‘Vidyut Niyamak Bhawan’, Near I.S.B.T., P.O.-Majra, Dehradun-248171
Shri Subhash Kumar Chairman
In exercise of the powers conferred under Section 181(2) (zd) & (zp) of Electricity Act, 2003 (the Act) the Commission had issued draft Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission (Tariff and Other Terms for Supply of Electricity from Renewable Energy Sources and non-fossil fuel based Co-generating Stations) Regulations, 2018 for the Control Period from FY 2018-19 to FY 2022-23.
The Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission had previously notified the UERC (Tariff and Other Terms for Supply of Electricity from Renewable Energy Sources and non-fossil fuel based Co-generating Stations) Regulations, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “previous Regulations” or “RE Regulations, 2013”). The RE Regulations, 2013 governed all the matters relating to determination of generic tariff and project specific tariff for the renewable energy based generating stations. These regulations had a control period of five financial years from the date of notification of same. The Commission issued the draft RE Regulations for the ensuing control period inviting comments/objections/suggestions on the same from the stakeholders. Last date of submission of comments/objections/suggestions was 21.05.2018. Comments/suggestions/objections received by the Commission have been duly analysed before considering them or rejecting the same.
The Commission also held a public hearing on 26.06.2018 to facilitate oral submission of the stakeholders and other interested persons. The comments/objections/suggestions of the stakeholders have also been considered. List of stakeholders who submitted comments on draft notification is placed at Annexure-I. List of participants who attended the hearing is also enclosed at Annexure-II.
The Statement of objects and Reasons is being issued with the intent of explaining the
rationale which went into finalisation of UERC (Tariff and Other Terms for Supply of Electricity from Renewable Energy Sources and non-fossil fuel based Co-generating Stations) Regulations, 2018 (hereinafter referred to as “RE Regulations, 2018”). However, in case of any deviation/discrepancy in the SOR with respect to RE Regulations, 2018 the provisions of RE Regulations, 2018 shall be applicable. The comments/suggestions/objections received from the stakeholders and public and the views of the Commission on the same are discussed in subsequent paragraphs.
Suggestions and objections of stakeholders and the Commission’s views thereon are discussed hereunder:
The Commission had proposed the following in the draft Regulations:
“Those RE plants commissioned prior to April 01, 2018, shall be governed by earlier regulations applicable as on date of commissioning of the respective RE plant.”
As already specified in Regulation 2(1), these regulations shall be applicable where supply of electricity is made from RE sources to the distribution licensees for the life of the project. Further, as already specified in the second proviso of Regulation 2(1), Regulations in Chapter 4 and 5 except clause (B) & (C) of sub-Regulation (1) of Regulation 26 of these Regulations as dealt in para 1.2 shall not be applicable for the generating stations commissioned prior to coming into effect of these Regulations. Accordingly, all other Chapters would equally apply to all the RE based generating stations. However, as mentioned in sub-Regulation (2) of Regulation 1 of these Regulations, these Regulations shall come into force with effect from the date of
notification. Hence, RE plants commissioned prior to the date of notification of these Regulations shall be governed by the tariffs specified/determined under the earlier regulations applicable as on date of commissioning of the respective RE plant. The Commission observed that the aforesaid sub-regulation deals with the applicability of these regulations, accordingly, the Commission has made necessary modification in Regulation 2, i.e. “Scope and extent of application” of these Regulations based on the above discussions.
The Commission had proposed the following in the draft Regulations:
“Provided further that Regulations in Chapter 4 & 5 shall not be applicable for generating stations commissioned prior to coming into effect of these Regulations and their present tariffs shall continue to be applicable. However, provision of normative levelised tariff of 12 paise/unit, over and above the generic tariff, for solar thermal/PV generating stations as specified in Regulation 15(1)(c) shall also be applicable to such stations commissioned prior to coming into effect of these Regulations. Provisions other than those in Chapter 4 and 5 shall apply to other generating stations located in the State of Uttarakhand, which are based on Renewable Sources of Energy including non-fossil fuel based Co-generation and which transmit and/or supply electricity to any person other than the distribution licensee of the State utilizing State Transmission and/or Distribution System.”
“Provided further that Regulation in Chapter 4 & 5 shall not be applicable for generating stations commissioned prior to coming into effect of these Regulations and their present tariffs
shall continue to be applicable except the Regulation 10(3)(a) for CUF(generation) of these regulation. However...”
“Provided further that Regulations in Chapter 4 & 5 (except clause (B) & (C) of sub-Regulation
(1) of Regulation 26) of these Regulations shall not be applicable for generating stations commissioned prior to coming into effect of these Regulations and their existing tariffs shall continue to be applicable;
Provided also that clause (d) of sub-Regulation (3) of Regulation 10, 2nd & 3rd proviso of sub-Regulation 7 of Regulation 14 shall be applicable to such stations commissioned prior to coming into effect of these Regulations;
Provided that the tariff computation norms shall be in accordance with the Regulations prevalent during the year of commissioning of those stations;
Provided also that normative levelised tariff of 12 paise/unit, over and above the generic tariff, for solar thermal/PV generating stations as specified in Regulation 15(1)(c) shall also be applicable to such stations commissioned prior to coming into effect of these Regulations;
Provided also that the Regulations other than those in Chapter 4 and 5 shall apply to other generating stations located in the State of Uttarakhand, which are based on Renewable Sources of Energy including non-fossil fuel based Co-generation and which transmit and/or supply electricity to any person other than the distribution licensee of the State utilizing State Transmission and/or Distribution System."
The Commission had proposed as follows in the draft Regulations:
"The existing projects, which are at present supplying power to third party shall have the option to switch over to supply to the distribution licensee or the local rural grid at generic tariffs as was applicable at the time of commissioning of their project or seek determination of project specific tariff from the Commission. The option shall be for the balance life of the project and shall not be allowed to be changed once it is exercised."
based generating company is willing to sale power within the State instead of supplying power outside the state using the natural resources available with the State. Further, tariff for such generation station shall be generic tariff as applicable on the date of commercial operation of the plant or the project specific tariff which will be determined by the Commission after prudence analysis of the capital cost and other technical parameters. Moreover, the Act, National Electricity Policy and the Tariff Policy emphasizes on promoting development of renewable and non-conventional sources of energy. Further, with regard to project specific tariff, Hon'ble APTEL vide its Judgment in Appeal no. 50 & 65 of 2008 and IA. 98 & 143 of 2008 has specifically mentioned that the generator will have an option to approach the Commission for project specific tariff or to adopt generic tariff determined by the Commission from time to time. Furthermore, with regard to UPCL's apprehension that the option to switch over given to the existing project, supplying power to third party, should not be unilateral and the same should only be allowed after mutual consent of the supplier and the Distribution licensee, the Commission would like to point out tariff determination under Section 62 of the Electricity Act, 2003 is only carried out for the generator if it has a PPA with the distribution licensee or the beneficiaries are identified. Regulation 2(1) of the draft RE Regulations, 2018 also specifies that the Regulations shall apply where supply of energy is being made from RE based generating stations to the distribution licensees or the beneficiaries are identified. Hence, the supply to the discom in the State will have to be established by the generator. However, as discussed under Para 1.10.2 of this SOR, necessary modifications are required in the aforesaid sub-regulations. According, final sub-regulations shall be read as follows:
"The existing projects, which are at present supply power to third party shall have the option to switch over to the distribution licensee subject to provisions of Regulations 7 of these Regulations or the local rural grid, at generic tariffs as was applicable at the time of commissioning of their project or seek determination of project specific tariff from the Commission. The option shall be for the balance life of the project and shall not be allowed to be changed once it is exercised."
The Commission had proposed as follows in the draft Regulations:
"Biomass" means waste produced during agricultural and forestry operations (for example straws and stalks) or produced as a by-product of processing operations of agricultural produce
(e.g., husks, shells, de-oiled cakes, etc); wood produced in dedicated energy plantations or recovered from wild bushes/weeds; and the wood waste produced in some industrial operations."
““Biomass” means wastes produced during agricultural and forestry operations (for example straws, stalks, pine needle and lantana) or produced as a by-product of processing operations of agricultural produce (e.g., husks, shells, de-oiled cakes, etc); wood produced in dedicated energy plantations or recovered from wild bushes/weeds; and the wood waste produced in some industrial operations.”
The Commission had proposed the following in the draft Regulations:
“Date of commercial operation or Commissioning (CoD)” Date of commercial operation or Commissioning (CoD)” in relation to a unit means the date declared by the generator on achieving maximum continuous rating through a successful trial run and in relation to the generating station, the date of commercial operation means the date of commercial operation of the last unit or block of generating station and expression ‘commissioning’ shall be construed
accordingly. In case of Small Hydro Plants the date of commissioning shall, however, not be linked to achieving maximum continuous rating, but the generator will have to demonstrate the same within three years of commissioning.
Provided further that in case of Solar PV plant, date of commercial operation or Commissioning (CoD) shall be considered as the date of first injection of power into the licensee's grid after completion of project in all respect subsequent to compliance of all the following pre-requisites:
“Performance Ratio” (PR) means the ratio of plant output versus installed plant capacity at any instance with respect to the radiation measured.
$$PR = \frac{\text{Measure output in kW}}{\text{Installed Plant capacity in kW}} \times \frac{1000 \text{ W/m}^2}{\text{Measured radiation intensity in W/m}^2}$$
keeping in view the disputes arising between the licensee and the generators in commissioning of solar projects, the Commission amended the definition of date of commercial operation or Commissioning (CoD) of Solar plants wherein commissioning was linked to performance ratio which was also considered by Solar Energy Corporation of India (SECI), GoI. Now UPCL is raising issues concerning absence of the procedure of measurement of radiation, authenticity of measurement and on whom such responsibility lies and suggested that certain generation/output in terms of percentage against the total installed capacity may be fixed irrespective of radiation intensity for confirming the CoD of the plant. In this regard, it is to be noted that generation of a solar plant is linked not only to the capacity of the project but also to the amount of radiation available. Further, the Regulation in this regard clearly specifies that the generator will have to demonstrate minimum 75% Performance Ratio based on the rated installed capacity in kW or MW at the time of inspection for initial commissioning. Hence, there is no ambiguity in this regard and accordingly, no change in the definition is being made.
The Commission had proposed the following in the draft Regulations:
““Design Energy” means the quantum of energy which can be generated in a 90% dependable year with 95% installed capacity of the hydro generating station”
1.6.2 It is to be noted that the DPR for the generation companies are approved by the Energy Department of GoUK. Moreover, approval of design Energy for SHPs does not come under the ambit of CEA. Planning of any HE Project is carried out based on 90 per cent dependability criteria. For determination of 90% dependable year, the total energy generation in all the years for which hydrological data is available (say N year) is arranged in descending order and the $(N+1) \times 0.9$ th year would represent the 90 per cent dependable year. The 90 per cent dependable year is thus, termed as the year in which the annual generation has the probability of being equal to or exceeds 90 per cent of the time on annual basis during the expected period of operation of the scheme. However, the hydrological data for the same needs to be for a sufficient number of years, say atleast 20 years. Most of the biggest disadvantage with the SHPs is the insignificant amount of data. Normally an initial DPR is prepared with a data of about 3 to 4 years which is not reliable and during the span of construction as more and more data is available, the calculation of design energy is more accurate. The correct calculation of design energy is also essential as the recovery of AFC of the generator is linked to the same. Hence, the Commission considers the approved DPR for the purpose of design energy for tariff fixation.
““Force Majeure Event” with respect to any party, any event or circumstance which is not within the reasonable control of, or due to an act or omission of, that party and which, by the exercise of reasonable care and due diligence, that party is not able to prevent, including, without limiting the generality of the foregoing:
down or interruption, which is required to avoid serious and immediate risks of a significant plant or equipment failure.”
The Commission had proposed the following in the draft Regulations:
“(2) At present, generation from following sources and technologies shall qualify to be covered under these Regulations:
Density (WPD) of 200 Watt/m2 measured at hub height of 50 meters and using new wind turbine generators.
turbine generators and solar PV systems will be configured to operate at the same point of grid connection. The policy also envisages to sale power to the distribution company either at the tariff determined by the respective SERC or at tariff discovered through transparent bidding process. UREDA also submitted that it will make the proposal for the installation of small scale wind solar power plant once the tariff for the same would be determined by the Commission. UREDA also requested to consider the energy generated from renewable sources (accepted by MNRE) as renewable energy. The technology should be considered as renewable energy or conventional energy as MNRE has accepted all the scientifically proven technology as renewable energy.
Clause (x) of sub-Regulation (1) of Regulation 3 shall be read as follows:
““Hybrid Wind Solar Power Plant” means the hybrid plant where Solar photovoltaic (PV) array coupled with a wind turbine and configured to operate at the same point of grid connection”
There shall be insertion of following clause after clause (i) of sub-Regulation (2) of Regulation 4:
“(j) Hybrid Wind-Solar power Plant- The project shall qualify to be termed as a hybrid Wind-Solar power plant, if Solar photovoltaic (PV) array coupled with a wind turbine and configured to operate at the same point of grid connection.”
cognizance of MNRE letter, the Commission decides to amend the proposed sub-Regulation (3) of Regulation (4). The Final sub-Regulation shall be read as follows:
“(3) Any new source or technology would qualify as ‘renewable energy’, only after such source/technology is based on scientifically proven technology approved by MNRE or any competent authorities under the central ministry. Further, the Commission shall determine tariffs separately for each technology after the approval of such scientifically proven technology by competent authority under the central ministry.”
The Commission had proposed as follows in the draft Regulations:
“(4) The RE Based Generating Stations and Co-generating Stations shall establish, operate and maintain generating station and the associated substation. The dedicated transmission lines, if constructed by the generator, shall also be operated and maintained by it (without the requirement of a license). These shall be in accordance with:
Open Access in inter-State Transmission and related matters Open Access in inter-State Transmission) Regulations, 2009 (the Sixth amendment).
1.9.2 The Commission has gone through the submission of PTCUL in the matter. It is to be noted that PTCUL being Transmission licensee and State Transmission utility is bound to ensure development of an efficient, co-ordinated and economical system of intra-State transmission lines for smooth flow of electricity from a generating station to the load centres. It would be easier to construct a dedicated transmission line for a generating company having a sound financial position whereas it will be tough for a small RE based generating company to construct a dedicated transmission line. Therefore, the option should be available with the RE based generators whether to construct dedicated line on its own or not. Accordingly, the Commission does not find it prudent to put the entire responsibility of construction of the dedicated transmission line on the RE based generator. Moreover, sub-Regulation (4) of Regulation 6 of these Regulations emphasizes on the technical parameters to be followed for the construction of line. To remove the ambiguity, the Commission has decided to amend the final Regulation which shall be read as follows:
“(4) The RE Based Generating Stations and Co-generating Stations shall establish, operate and maintain generating station, the associated substation and dedicated transmission lines, if it exercises the option to establish the line. These shall be in accordance with:
The Commission had proposed as follows in the draft Regulations:
“(1) All RE Based Generating Stations and Co-generating Stations shall be allowed to sell power, over and above the capacity required for their own use, to the distribution licensee or to local rural grids at the rates determined by the Commission or to any consumer/person within the State or outside the State at mutually agreed rates (provided that such consumer has been allowed Open Access under Open Access Regulations)
(2) The distribution licensee on an offer made by the said RE based Generating Stations and Co-generating Stations shall enter into a power purchase agreement in conformity with these Regulations and relevant provisions of other Regulations and the Act. The distribution licensee shall sign the PPA within two months of offer made by the generating company, failing which the generating company may approach the Commission for suitable remedy.”
UPCL has submitted that it should have a liberty to enter into a PPA based on its requirements. The choice of entering into a PPA with a generator vests with the licensee keeping in view its requirement of power as also the commercial terms including the price. Accordingly, sub-Regulation (1) & (2) is modified to the extent as given below:
“(1) All RE Based Generating Stations and Co-generating Stations shall be allowed to sell power, over and above the capacity required for their own use, to the distribution licensee provided that distribution licensee is willing to enter into a PPA or to local rural grids at the rates determined by the Commission or to any consumer/person within the State or outside the State at mutually agreed rates (provided that such consumer has been allowed Open Access under Open Access Regulations).
(2) The distribution licensee on an offer made by the said RE based Generating Stations and Co-generating Stations may enter into a power purchase agreement in conformity with these Regulations and relevant provisions of other Regulations and the Act. However, if the distribution licensee intends to purchase power from such generator it shall sign the PPA within two months of offer made by the generating company. Otherwise, if the distribution licensee is not willing to purchase power from such generator it shall intimate the same to the generating company within one month of offer made by it...”
In the draft Regulation, the Commission had proposed as follows:
“(1) In line with the provisions of the Act, National Electricity Policy, the Tariff Policy to promote development of renewable and non-conventional sources of energy, all existing and future distribution licensees, captive users and open access customers, hereinafter referred to as “Obligated Entity”, in the State shall be obliged to procure minimum percentage of their total electricity requirement for own consumption, as indicated below, from eligible renewable energy sources as defined under Regulation 4. The same shall be called the Renewable Purchase Obligation (RPO) of the Obligated Entities.
| Year | Renewable Purchase Obligation -Non-Solar | Renewable Purchase Obligation-Solar |
|---|---|---|
| 2018-19 | 10.25% | 6.75% |
| 2019-20 | 11.00% | 7.00% |
| 2020-21 | 11.75% | 7.50% |
| 2021-22 | 12.50% | 8.00% |
| 2022-23 | 13.00% | 8.00% |
Percentage RPO as stipulated above denotes Minimum Quantum of purchase from non-fossil fuel based co-generation and generation of electricity from renewable energy sources' as a percentage of total energy purchased from all sources/generated by the Obligated Entity during the year for own consumption.
Where, total energy purchased for different obligated entities shall be as under:
Provided further that Non-Solar & Solar RPO shall be applicable on total consumption of electricity by an obligated entity excluding consumption met from hydro sources of power.
Provided that if the RPO from solar is not met in a particular year, then in such cases, additional non-solar RE energy, over and above their RPO, shall be utilized for fulfillment of the solar RPO.
Provided that if energy from renewable and non-conventional sources of energy becomes available in the State, over and above the specified RPO, the generator or the distribution company of the State can approach the Commission for permitting procurement of such energy in excess of specified RPO.
(2) For the purpose of this RPO framework, for every obligated entity, own consumption would mean gross energy consumed or purchased by the obligated entity from all sources for its own use or for the purpose of supply to its consumers within its area of supply, excluding any inter-se sale of electricity amongst the Licensees or outside consumers."
consumption in the year, i.e. at the end of March of financial year can be calculated only after the receipt of bills of electricity supplied from generators and after finalization of Regional Energy Account. The bills are raised by the generators in the month following the consumption month and sometimes even after one month of consumption month. The receipt of bills of generation of electricity from generators and their onwards processing, recording and payment etc. take 45 to 60 days time period and because of this time lag the actual consumption of electricity and energy from RE sources in the month of March cannot be ascertained with 100% accuracy in the month of March itself. Therefore, it is difficult to precisely calculate quantum of RE power/REC required to be purchased for fulfilling RPO. UPCL suggested to allow a provision of 10% deviation in RPO met by DISCOM by the end of March against actual RPO targets wherein unfulfilled or over fulfilled RPO be considered as carried forward for next year automatically.
the matter clearly stipulating that compliance of RPO should be strictly ensured and no carry forward should be allowed. Moreover, MNRE vide its letter dated 10.10.2017 and 05.12.2017 sought the State Commission's to align the RPOs with national trajectory and further to ensure compliance of the same and has also requested the Commissions to use the penal provisions under the law in case of non-compliance of RPO provisions. Further, during the meeting dated 23.05.2018 of Hon'ble Minister of State (I/C) for Power and New & Renewable Energy with SERCs in the matter of Renewable energy, SERCs were requested to take measure to disallow any carry forward of yearly RPO targets. Further, allowing a provision of 10% to meet the deviation in RPO in subsequent month of a financial year will be akin to allowing carry forward of unmet RPO which will be against the Act/Regulations.
Further, it can also not be denied that the bills for supply of electricity are raised by the generator after the end of month and it would not be possible for the licensee to predict energy consumption for the last month of the financial year accurately. With regard to shortfall in RPO, Regulation 7 of UERC (Compliance of Renewable Purchase Obligation) Regulations, 2010 specifies as follows:
7.1 If the Obligated Entity does not fulfill its commitment towards Renewable Purchase Obligation during any year as provided under UERC (Tariff and Other Terms of Supply of Electricity from Co-generation and Renewable Energy Sources) Regulations 2010, and also does not purchase adequate certificate for meeting the shortfalls, the Commission may direct the Obligated Entity to deposit into a separate RPO Fund such amount as the Commission may determine on the basis of the shortfall in units of RPO, Preferential Tariffs applicable in the State and forbearance price as decided by Central Commission:
Provided that the responsibility of intimating such shortfall within one month of close of that year shall be that of State Agency. Provided further that the fund so created shall be utilised only after approval of the Commission for purchase of certificates or as may be directed by the Commission:
..."
It is observed from the aforesaid Regulation that in case of any shortfall in RPO, the Obligated Entity may be directed to deposit into a separate RPO Fund such amount as the Commission may determine on the basis of shortfall in the units of RPO and
such fund shall be utilised for purchase of the RECs or as directed by the Commission. Accordingly, the Commission is of the view that the distribution licensee shall estimate the RPO shortfall for both solar and non-solar for the month of March of the financial year based on the estimated consumption for the month of March and also the compliance made by it for both solar as well as non-solar RPO till February for a particular financial year. Based on such estimates for March, distribution licensee shall deposit the amount to be utilised for the purchase of RECs in the month of March in a separate RPO Fund in accordance with the aforesaid Regulation and intimate the Commission within seven days from the deposit of such amount into a separate RPO Fund which shall be utilised for meeting the shortfall in solar as well as non-solar RPO through purchase of RECs only. This is necessitated so that the distribution licensee is able to meet its RPO compliances for the financial year and does not land in a situation wherein due to incorrect estimates it purchases RECs more than what is warranted for which no benefit is available to it. However, it has to be ensured by the distribution licensee that all the RPO compliances till the end of February are met by it by way of purchase of RE power as well as RECs before the end of March of that financial year. Further, the Commission is of the view that the distribution licensee should finalise the energy accounts for a financial year by the end of subsequent month. Accordingly, the distribution licensee shall utilise the money lying in RPO Fund for the purchase of RECs only to meet its renewable purchase obligation by the end of May of the ensuing financial year. Further, in case any amount remains unutilised in the RPO Fund after purchasing the said RECs, such amount shall be utilised for the purchase of RECs for the subsequent year to meet its RPO.
| Gross energy consumption excluding Hydro Energy | RPO Obligation | RPO cumulative upto the Month (1) | RE Purchase for the month (MUs) | Total RE Purchase for the Month | RE Cumulative Compliance upto the Month (2) | Short fall if any (1-2) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Month | MUs | MUs | MUs | Through Pref Tariff | Through REC | MUs | MUs | MUs |
| April | 410.23 | 19.49 | 19.49 | 10.00 | - | 10.00 | 10.00 | 9.49 |
| May | 475.33 | 22.58 | 42.07 | 15.00 | - | 15.00 | 25.00 | 17.07 |
| June | 310.75 | 14.76 | 56.83 | 15.00 | - | 15.00 | 40.00 | 16.83 |
| July | 197.06 | 9.36 | 66.19 | 15.00 | - | 15.00 | 55.00 | 11.19 |
| August | 166.49 | 7.91 | 74.10 | 15.00 | - | 15.00 | 70.00 | 4.1 |
| September | 342.94 | 16.29 | 90.39 | 20.41 | - | 20.41 | 90.41 | -0.02 |
| October | 422.15 | 20.05 | 110.44 | 23.00 | - | 23.00 | 113.41 | -2.97 |
| November | 567.90 | 26.98 | 137.42 | 24.00 | - | 24.00 | 137.41 | 0.01 |
| December | 635.86 | 30.20 | 167.62 | 21.00 | - | 21.00 | 158.41 | 9.21 |
| January | 729.26 | 34.64 | 202.26 | 18.00 | - | 18.00 | 176.41 | 25.85 |
| February | 655.41 | 31.13 | 233.39 | 18.00 | 10.00 | 28.00 | 204.41 | 28.98 |
| March | 312.33 | 14.84 | 248.23 | 28.83 | - | 28.83 | 233.24 | 14.99 |
| Total | 14.99 |
The Distribution Licensee shall deposit an amount into the RPO fund equivalent to 15 MUs based on the forbearance price as decided by Central Commission in the month of March of the financial year. Subsequently, on the finalisation of the energy accounts, distribution licensee shall purchase the required RECs, latest by end of May of the ensuing financial year, to meet its renewable purchase obligation as specified by the Commission from time to time beyond which no carry forward shall be allowed and action may be taken against the distribution licensee in accordance with the Regulations for non-compliance.
Further, the Commission has observed that approximately 20 MW rooftop solar PV plants have been installed by Nodal Agency within the State of Uttarakhand under net metering arrangement. Further, where distribution licensee has provided grid connectivity under any Central/State Government Scheme to the rooftop solar power plant owner with or without executing the PPA based on the provisions of the schemes, the energy injected into the grid by such plants is being utilized by the distribution licensee to meet its renewable purchase obligation. Here, it is to be noted that with the installation of the solar power plants within the State by individual consumers, the overall power procurement by UPCL through conventional/non-conventional sources will reduce proportionately to such extent whereas in the absence of such rooftop power plants, distribution licensee would be required to procure renewable power from other generators to comply with the RPO Regulations, 2010.
Here, it is worth mentioning that the primary motive of the Renewable Purchase Obligation is to switch over the usage from conventional energy to the renewable/ green energy in State and with the installation of such plants the purpose of the renewable purchase obligation is met. Therefore, solar power generated from such rooftop based solar power plants can also be considered by the distribution licensee to comply with RPO Regulations, 2010. Accordingly, distribution licensee shall be eligible for utilization of the gross solar energy generated, as per gross meter reading, from the rooftop power plants installed by the non-obligated entities.
Accordingly, taking cognizance of the comments of UREDA and Ministry of Power's Order dated 14.06.2018, the Commission decides to amend the proposed draft Regulation. The final Regulation shall be read as follows:
“(1) In line with the provisions of the Act, National Electricity Policy, the Tariff Policy to promote development of renewable and non-conventional sources of energy, all existing and future distribution licensees, captive users and open access customers, hereinafter referred to as “Obligated Entity”, in the State shall be obliged to procure minimum percentage of their total electricity requirement for own consumption, as indicated below, from eligible renewable energy sources as defined under Regulation 4. The same shall be called the Renewable Purchase Obligation (RPO) of the Obligated Entities.
| Year | Renewable Purchase Obligation -Non-Solar | Renewable Purchase Obligation-Solar |
|---|---|---|
| 2018-19 | 10.25% | 6.75% |
| 2019-20 | 10.25% | 7.25% |
| 2020-21 | 10.25% | 8.75% |
| 2021-22 | 10.50% | 10.50% |
| 2022-23 | 11.00% | 11.00% |
Percentage RPO as stipulated above denotes Minimum Quantum of purchase from non-fossil fuel based co-generation and generation of electricity from renewable energy sources' as a percentage of total energy purchased from all sources/generated by the Obligated Entity during the year for own consumption.
Where, total energy purchased for different obligated entities shall be as under:
Provided further that Non-Solar & Solar RPO shall be applicable on total energy
purchased/generated of electricity by an obligated entity excluding consumption met from hydro sources of power;
Provided that on achievement of Solar RPO compliance to the extent of 85% and above, remaining shortfall, if any, can be met by excess Non-Solar energy purchased beyond specified Non-Solar RPO for that particular year;
Provided further that on achievement of Non-Solar RPO compliance to the extent of 85% and above, remaining shortfall, if any, can be met by excess Solar energy purchased beyond specified Solar RPO for that particular year.
(2) For the purpose of this RPO framework, for every obligated entity, own consumption would mean gross energy consumed or purchased by the obligated entity from all sources for its own use or for the purpose of supply to its consumers within its area of supply, excluding any inter-sale of electricity amongst the Licensees or outside consumers.
(3) Distribution licensee shall be eligible to utilize the gross Solar energy generated from the rooftop or small solar power plants of non-obligated entities for meeting its Solar RPO compliance based on the gross energy generated meter reading of such rooftop or small solar power plant."
The Commission had proposed the following in the draft Regulations:
"(2) The RE Based Generating Stations and Co-generating Stations, except those mentioned under second Proviso to sub-Regulation (1) of Regulation 2, may opt for the generic tariff, as determined based on norms specified in these Regulations for different technologies, or may file a petition before the Commission for determination of "Project Specific Tariff". For this purpose, RE Based Generating Stations and Co-generating Stations shall give its option to the distribution licensee at least 3 months in advance of date of commissioning of the project or commissioning of the first unit, in case of multiple units or one month after the date of issuance of these Regulations, whichever is later. This option once exercised shall not be allowed to be changed during the validity period of the PPA."
station is clearly mentioned and the delay in achieving the same may also entail imposition of penalty. There are no guiding factors as to the cost implications incurred after such SCOD infact the same is subject to the prudence check of the Commission and very small information is provided at the time of filing petition which is very scanty for the Commission because of which the generating stations mostly get the benefits of facts which are totally within their control and can be manipulated. UPCL also submitted that date of exercising option by the generating company should be SCOD as generator can conveniently delay the project as suited to their interest. The Distribution Licensee submitted that there are diverse circumstances which have impact upon the generating station and the time period for commissioning the same, however, there is no control of the utility over any of those factors and the same has been left totally at the discretion of the generator. Therefore, certain guidelines and effective measures be laid down so that the Commission and buyer of power are fully apprised of all the factors and circumstances effecting cost overrun, increment in actual cost, variation from the approved DPR and timely intimation together with necessary information in form of a bar chart for any delay beyond SCOD. The Distribution licensee has no control over the enhanced cost of purchase of power and conserving the cancellation of PPA may also have various legal complications.
UPCL also submitted that there are many generating stations which have made material deviations from the terms and conditions of the implementation agreement meaning thereby that the very basis on which the project is allotted are rendered nugatory which is definitely a malpractice and a fraud and should not be permitted. Therefore, the Commission should specify the criteria for exercising the prudence check and it should be emphasized.
overrun, increment in actual cost, variation from the approved DPR and timely intimation within the time limits included in the PPA of all such events/occurrence together with necessary information in the form of a bar chart for any delay beyond SCOD. Further, in case distribution licensee at any point of time feels that the generating company has violated the implementation agreement entered into with the State Government, it may approach the Government in this matter so that the State Government may take necessary action in this regard. With regard to the prudence check, the Commission considers the increase in costs arising mainly due to controllable and uncontrollable factors in light of the various judicial pronouncements. Therefore, no change is being made in the existing provision in this regard. Further, the Commission has observed that the aforesaid regulation is silent regarding applicability of tariff i.e. Generic Tariff or project specific tariff, in case the generating station fails to give its option with stipulated timeframe. Accordingly, to remove the ambiguity in the aforesaid sub-regulations, the same shall be read as follows:
“(2) The RE Based Generating Stations and Co-generating Stations, except those mentioned under second Proviso to sub-Regulation (1) of Regulation 2, may opt for the generic tariff, as determined based on norms specified in these Regulations for different technologies, or may file a petition before the Commission for determination of “Project Specific Tariff”. For this purpose, RE Based Generating Stations and Co-generating Stations shall give its option to the distribution licensee at least 3 months in advance of date of commissioning of the project or commissioning of the first unit, in case of multiple units. This option once exercised shall not be allowed to be changed during the validity period of the PPA.
Provided that the option of seeking projects specific tariff shall not be available to Grid interactive roof top and small solar PV plants, Solar PV Power Plants, Canal Top & Canal Bank based Solar PV Power Plants, Solar Thermal Plants, Wind Energy Power Plants and other RE based power projects having installed capacity upto 1 MW.
Provided that if generating company does not give its option to the distribution licensee within above stipulated time, generic tariff shall be applicable based on the date of commissioning of the project or commissioning of the first unit, in case of multiple units”
The Commission had proposed as follows in the draft Regulations:
“(3) Project Specific Tariff, on case to case basis, shall be determined by the Commission in the following cases:
Provided that the Commission while determining the Project Specific Tariff shall be bound by the provisions of Chapter 4 & 5 of these Regulations for technologies specifies therein."
"For projects opting to have their tariffs determined on the basis of actual capital cost instead of normative capital cost as specified for different technologies under Chapter 5, the CUF (generation) for recovery of fixed charges shall be taken as that envisaged in the approved DPR or the normative CUF specified under Chapter 5 for the relevant technology, whichever is higher;
However, the Commission may revisit CUF(generation) in light of sufficient documentary evidences/facts, if there is substantial change in actual generation vis-à-vis generation specified
in approved DPR, due to reasons beyond control of the Generating Company or due to change in law(s) for the projects whose tariff has already been determined."
"(3) Project Specific Tariff, on case to case basis, shall be determined by the Commission in the following cases:
Provided that the Commission while determining the Project Specific Tariff shall be guided by the provisions of Chapter 4 & 5 of these Regulations for technologies specifies therein."
The Commission had proposed as follows in the draft Regulations:
"(1)The Control Period or Review Period under these Regulations shall be of five years, of which the first year shall be the financial year 2018-19.
Provided that the benchmark capital cost of Solar PV, Canal Bank & Canal Top Solar PV, Solar Thermal, Municipal Solid Waste based power projects, Refuse Derived Fuel based power projects and Grid interactive Roof Top and Small Solar PV projects may be reviewed annually by the Commission.
Provided further that the tariff determined as per these Regulations for the RE projects commissioned during the Control Period, shall continue to be applicable for the entire Tariff Period (Useful life of the plant) as specified under Regulation 3(1)(zz)"
delayed at the end of UPCL due to delay in providing the connectivity by UPCL. The concerned organisations should expedite all the procedures related to installation and connectivity of solar power projects and planning should be done in such a manner so that the solar plant gets commissioned within a financial year.
The Commission had proposed as follows in the draft Regulations:
“(3) PPA shall be required to be executed with distribution licensee for the entire Tariff Period.”
that the future tariffs are derived considering suitable escalation in the O&M cost on year on year basis and then levelised tariff is determined by the Commission based on the time value of money. Hence, inflation will not have any impact on the real tariff. In view of the above discussion, no change is required in the said Regulation.
The Commission had proposed as follows in the Draft Regulations:
“(3)A petition for determination of project specific tariff shall be accompanied by such fee as specified in the UERC (Fee and Fines) Regulations, 2002, as amended from time to time, and shall be accompanied by:”
The Commission had proposed as follows in the draft Regulations:
“(4)The generic tariff is based on normative parameters as per the norms specified in these Regulations for each type of source and the year of commissioning of the plant. Tariff in respect of a RE Based Generating Stations and Co-generating Stations under these Regulations shall be applicable for the whole generating station.
Provided that the generic tariff for supply of electricity from the plant, having more than one unit commissioned during currency of different control period, shall be based on weighted average of the tariffs specified under different Regulations for the total capacity of the plant.
(7) xxx
xxx
Provided that additional capitalisation on this account would only be allowed if appropriate and
adequate insurance cover was available for the generating station at the time of occurrence of natural calamities referred to above. However, additional capitalisation on this account will only be limited to the extent of damages which shall be duly substantiated by the claim lodged with the insurance company."
additional capitalization has been linked to the extent of damages duly substantiated by the claim lodged with the insurance company. UPCL submitted that lodging of the claim is totally discretion of the generating company and has no relation with the actual extent of damages which can be linked with the final verified damage by the insurance. Therefore, it is proposed that in the third proviso in place of “claim lodged with the insurance company” it should provide “the damage finally verified and approved for claim by the insurance company”. UPCL also submitted that during the process of determination of tariff due to additional capitalization had resulted in various difficulties like, UPCL has no information regarding the extent of damage caused during natural calamity, the works proposed and its cost and various such other factors including the awarding of works to the contractors in a way which does not appear to be fair and just. UPCL felt helpless as there were no guiding principles in this regard and generators are taking undue advantages out of it.
With regard to UPCL’s submissions that it had no information regarding the extent of damage caused during natural calamity, the works proposed and its cost and various other factors including the awarding of works to the contractors, it is unimaginable being a beneficiary how it wasn’t aware of the damages caused to a generating station due to natural calamity. It has its field officers in every part of the State and nobody stopped it from sending its officers to the project site to get the damage assessed. Regarding the information relating to the extent of damages and the works proposed to be carried out for restoration, it can always ask the generator to provide such information by suitably incorporating the relevant provisions in the PPA, if not already there. However, with reference to the awarding of works to the contractors it is the management’s decision and UPCL has no role in interfering with
the work of the management of the private company.
With reference to the UPCL's submissions regarding replacement of "claim lodged with the insurance company" by "the damage finally verified and approved for claim by the insurance company", the information on damages finally verified and approved would depend to the extent the insurance company is forthwith in sharing the information. Further, the insurance companies verifies the claim of the damaged equipment and while settling the same it may not allow the claim for various items as per its policy, like removal of debris etc. thereby limiting the claim against the damaged asset. Hence, it would not be appropriate to consider the damages finally verified and approved for claim by the insurance company. Further, with regard to proposed provision in the draft regulation that the additional capitalization on account of restoration work be restricted to the extent of damages which shall be duly substantiated by the claimed lodged with the insurance company, the Commission agrees with the comments of stakeholders in one way that it depends upon the discretion of the generator and on the other side repair cost cannot be substituted by the insurance claim on account of requirement of restoration works. Accordingly, the Commission decides to remove the provision of additional capitalization duly substantiated by the claim lodged with the insurance company from the last proviso of Regulation 14. However, a proper and diligent review of the damages as well as restoration works to be done by the generating company is very much required. The Commission is of the view that the generating company shall intimate the Commission and distribution licensee within one week from the occurrence of any such force majeure event/natural calamity etc. which leads to shut down of the plant due to damage.
Based on the above discussion, the Commission does not find prudent to amend sub-Regulation (4) of Regulation 14 of these Regulations. However, the Commission amends the last proviso of Regulation 14 which shall be as follows:
“Provided that additional capitalisation on this account would only be allowed if appropriate and adequate insurance cover was available for the generating station at the time of occurrence of natural calamities referred to above. The generating company shall intimate the Commission and Distribution Licensee within seven days from the occurrence of any such force majeure event resulting into shut down of plant. The Commission may in such case direct the distribution licensee and state nodal agency to visit the damaged plant and assess the nature & type of damages and restoration works required in coordination with the generator/developer.”
The Commission had proposed as follows in the draft Regulations:
“(a) The norms for the Capital Cost as specified in the subsequent technology specific provisions in Chapter 5 shall include the expenditure incurred or projected to be incurred, initial spares, interest during construction (IDC) and financing charges, incidental expenditure during construction (IEDC) any gain or loss on account of foreign exchange risk variation during construction on loans arrived in the manner specified in sub Regulation 2 below upto the date of commercial operation or commissioning of the project, as admitted by the Commission after prudence check. The capital cost shall also include the expenditure incurred or projected to be incurred towards the evacuation infrastructure upto point of interconnection (i.e. it does not include cost of dedicated line and associated equipment from point of interconnection up-to the nearest sub-station of transmission or distribution licensee to which generating station is connected).
(b) In case of additional costs on account of IDC, Finance charges and IEDC due to delay in achieving the Schedule CoD, the generating company shall be required to furnish detailed justification with supporting documents for such delay including the details of IDC, Finance Charges and IEDC during the period of delay and liquidated damages recovered or recoverable corresponding to the delay:
Provided that if the delay is not attributable to the generating company and is due to uncontrollable factors, such expenditures may be allowed after due prudence check:
Provided further that where the delay is attributable to an agency or contractor or supplier engaged by the generating company, the liquidated damages recovered from such agency or
contractor or supplier shall be kept in view while computing the capital cost.
(c) In case, individual generating company opts to construct the evacuation infrastructure from point of inter-connection to the nearest sub-station of transmission or distribution licensee to which the generating station is connected, it shall be allowed a normative levelised tariff of 5 paise/unit over and above the generic tariff determined at the point of inter-connection. However, in case of a solar generating company a normative levelised tariff of 12 paise/unit over and above the generic tariff determined at the point of inter-connection shall be allowed.
The said normative tariff for evacuation infrastructure has been arrived at considering the cost of normative line length of 10 kms. (including cost of terminal equipments) for different capacities of generating stations as per normative cost given below:
| (i) Upto 3 MW, 11 kV S/C | - Rs. 44 lakh |
| (ii) Above 3 MW and upto 13 MW, 33 kV S/C | - Rs. 85 lakh |
| (iii) Above 13 MW and upto 25 MW, 33 kV 2 x S/C or DC | - Rs. 170 lakh |
Provided that in case of construction of common line for evacuation of power for more than one generator, aforesaid normative levelised tariff shall be apportioned among the users of the said line."
which the recovery through levelised tariff against the cost of construction of line may be permitted. With regard to recovery of cost of line, UPCL submitted that generator can recover the actual cost in a very short span of time and thereafter it becomes a source of income and proposed proviso appears to be ineffective as apportionment of levelised tariff would infact amount to the same effect as the line of that capacity constructed by the single generator, hence, again permitting faster and undue recovery of the cost and additional income. The line should be transferred to the licensee.
1.18.2 UREDA submitted that in the said clause it is not clear that upto what time duration the additional normative levelised tariff will be provided to the generators. The additional normative levelised tariff are taken different for RE generators (except solar) and solar generators whereas the cost of the construction of the evacuation infrastructure are same for all the RE projects. Hence, the Commission is requested to allow RE generating companies a normative levelised tariff over and above the generic tariff till the recovery of evacuation infrastructure cost for the construction of such evacuation infrastructure from point of inter-connection to the nearest sub-station of transmission or distribution licensee to which the generating station is connected. Further, all the RE based generators shall be allowed equal additional normative levelised tariff for the construction of evacuation system.
1.18.3 M/s Avani Bio Energy (P) Ltd. submitted that the actual cost of setting up evacuation infrastructure is Rs. 214745 in case of the 10 kW power plant set up in Simalta village which is proportionately much higher than Rs. 44 Lakh allowed for power plant of 1 MW. It requested the Commission to consider the higher costs to calculate the normative levelised tariff.
1.18.4 All the expenditures are prudently examined by the Commission while approving the hard cost, IDC or IEDC. Further, generally all the construction contracts contain provisions regarding Liquidated Damages, Price Variation and Quantity Variation. Moreover, the contract executed between generator and EPC is a commercial operation, and the Commission does not find it prudent to provide any guidelines or terms and conditions for the same. Further, the Distribution licensee may insert a provision in the PPA regarding submission of progress report including Technical & Financial data and other information which it deems fit for monitoring work in
progress of the project and track delay in the commissioning of the project including time and cost overrun.
Commission decides to replace the existing Regulation in the Draft Regulations by the following:
“(a) The norms for the Capital Cost as specified in the subsequent technology specific provisions in Chapter 5 shall include the expenditure incurred or projected to be incurred, initial spares, interest during construction (IDC) and financing charges, incidental expenditure during construction (IEDC), any gain or loss on account of foreign exchange risk variation during construction on loans arrived in the manner specified in sub-regulation (2) below upto the date of commercial operation or commissioning of the project, as admitted by the Commission after prudence check. The capital cost shall also include the expenditure incurred or projected to be incurred towards the switchyard etc. upto the point of interconnection (i.e. it does not include cost of dedicated line and associated equipment from point of interconnection upto the nearest sub-station of transmission or distribution licensee to which generating station is connected).
(b) In case of additional costs on account of IDC, Finance charges and IEDC due to delay in achieving the Schedule CoD, the generating company shall be required to furnish detailed justification with supporting documents for such delay including the details of IDC, Finance Charges and IEDC during the period of delay and liquidated damages recovered or recoverable corresponding to the delay:
Provided that if the delay is not attributable to the generating company and is due to uncontrollable factors, such expenditures may be allowed after due prudence check;
Provided further that where the delay is attributable to an agency or contractor or supplier engaged by the generating company, the liquidated damages recovered from such agency or contractor or supplier shall be kept in view while computing the capital cost.
(c) In case individual generating company opts to construct, at its own cost, the evacuation infrastructure from point of inter-connection to the nearest sub-station of transmission or distribution licensee to which the generating station is connected, it shall be allowed a normative levelised tariff of 5 paise/unit over and above the generic tariff determined at the point of inter-connection. However, in case of a solar generating company a normative levelised tariff of 12 paise/unit over and above the generic tariff determined at the point of inter-connection shall be allowed.
The said normative tariff for evacuation infrastructure has been arrived at considering the cost of normative line length of 10 kms. (including cost of terminal equipments) for different capacities of generating stations as per normative cost given below:
(i) Upto 3 MW, 11 kV S/C
- Rs. 44 lakh
Provided that in case more than one generating stations construct, at its own cost, a common evacuation infrastructure including pooling switching station, in accordance with Regulation 41 of these Regulations, for evacuation of power of their generation, then the above normative levelised tariff shall be apportioned among all such generating stations on the basis of their installed capacity."
The Commission had proposed as follows in the draft Regulations:
"(3) Subsidy available from MNRE, to the extent specified under Regulation 24, shall be considered to have been utilized towards pre-payment of debt leaving balance loan and 30% equity to be considered for determination of tariff.
Provided further that it shall be assumed that the original repayments shall not be affected by this prepayment."
based on the norms specified in the Regulations. Further, allowing interest on loan on actual basis and reducing subsidy from the normative debt will be inconsistent. As the tariff is determined based on the normative parameters, it will be irrelevant to reduce the subsidy from normative debt if interest on loan is to be allowed on actual basis.
The Commission had proposed as follows in the draft Regulations:
“(2) For the purpose of computation of generic tariff, the normative interest rate shall be considered as average State Bank of India (SBI) Marginal Cost of Funds based Lending Rate (MCLR) (one year tenor) prevalent during the last available six months plus 200 basis points.
For the purpose of computation of project specific tariff, interest rate shall be considered as lower of the actual interest payable to the financial institutions or the average State Bank of India (SBI) Marginal Cost of Funds based Lending Rate (MCLR) (one year tenor) prevalent during the last available six months plus 200 basis points.
(3) Notwithstanding any moratorium period availed by the generating company, the repayment of loan is being considered from the first year of commercial operation of the project and shall be equal to the annual depreciation allowed.
While calculating project specific tariff, notwithstanding any moratorium period availed by the generating company, the repayment of loan shall be considered from the first year of commercial operation of the project and shall be equal to the annual depreciation allowed or actual repayment made, whichever is higher.
(4) Normative period of loan repayment shall be taken as 12 years”.
Accordingly, they requested the Commission to consider repayment period of 13 years in place of 12 years. In certain projects, financial institutions fix repayment longer than 12 year. The same may be considered for the purpose for project specific tariffs so that actual AFC may be recovered.
2018 onwards. Detail of the MCLR is as follows:
| Marginal Cost of Funds Based Lending Rate | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Effective Date | Interest Rate (%) | ||||
| 3 Year | 2 Year | 1 Year | 6 Months | Over Night | |
| 01.04.2016 | 9.35 | 9.30 | 9.20 | 9.15 | 8.95 |
| 01.05.2016 | 9.30 | 9.25 | 9.15 | 9.10 | 8.90 |
| 01.08.2016 | 9.25 | 9.20 | 9.10 | 9.05 | 8.85 |
| 01.10.2016 | 9.20 | 9.15 | 9.05 | 9.00 | 8.80 |
| 01.11.2016 | 9.05 | 9.00 | 8.90 | 8.85 | 8.65 |
| 01.01.2017 | 8.15 | 8.10 | 8.00 | 7.95 | 7.75 |
| 01.11.2017 | 8.10 | 8.05 | 7.95 | 7.90 | 7.70 |
| 01.03.2018 | 8.35 | 8.25 | 8.15 | 8.00 | 7.80 |
| 01.07.2018 | 8.45 | 8.35 | 8.25 | 8.10 | 7.90 |
It can be seen from the table that though w.e.f. 01.03.2018 onwards MCLR has been going upwards, however, it come down from 9.20% on 01.04.2016 to 7.95% on 01.11.2017. The rate of interest is a normative rate and has been considered for a loan tenure of 13 years. Hence, any gain or loss due to variation will be to the account of the developer/generator. Further, the Commission agrees with the comments of the Stakeholders that frequent natural calamities and other factors affects the operations as well as financials of the SHPs which impacts the repaying power of the developers. Accordingly, based on the above the Commission decides to increase the spread of 200 basis points by additional 100 basis points. Hence, the final aforesaid regulation shall be read as follows:
“(2) For the purpose of computation of generic tariff, the normative interest rate shall be considered as average State Bank of India (SBI) Marginal Cost of Funds based Lending Rate (MCLR) (one year tenor) prevalent during the last available six months plus 300 basis points.
For the purpose of computation of project specific tariff, interest rate shall be considered as lower of the actual interest payable to the financial institutions or the average State Bank of India (SBI) Marginal Cost of Funds based Lending Rate (MCLR) (one year tenor) prevalent during the last available six months from the date of Petition plus 300 basis points.
(3) Notwithstanding any moratorium period availed by the generating company, the repayment of loan is being considered from the first year of commercial operation of the project and shall be equal to the annual depreciation allowed.
While calculating project specific tariff, notwithstanding any moratorium period availed by the generating company, the repayment of loan shall be considered from the first year of commercial operation of the project and shall be equal to the annual depreciation allowed or actual repayment made, whichever is higher.
(4) Normative period of loan repayment shall be taken as 13 years”.
The Commission had proposed as follows in the draft Regulations:
“(c) The depreciation rate for the first 12 years of the Tariff Period shall be 5.83% per annum and the remaining depreciation shall be spread over the remaining useful life of the project from 13th year onwards considering salvage value of the project as 10% of the project cost.”
“(c) The depreciation rate for the first 13 years of the Tariff Period shall be 5.38% per annum and the remaining depreciation shall be spread over the remaining useful life of the project from 14th year onwards considering salvage value of the project as 10% of the project cost.”
The Commission had proposed as follows in the draft Regulations:
“(2) The Return on Equity (Post tax) shall be 15.5% for the Renewable energy source based power projects.
Pre-tax RoE shall be 19% per annum for the first 10 years considering Average MAT rate as on 1st April, 2018.
Pre-tax RoE shall be 21% per annum from 11th year onwards considering average Corporate Tax as on 1st April, 2018."
"(2) The Return on Equity (Post tax) shall be 16% for the Renewable energy source based power projects.
Pre-tax RoE shall be 20% per annum for the first 10 years considering Average MAT rate as on 1st April, 2018.
Pre-tax RoE shall be 22% per annum from 11th year onwards considering Average Corporate Tax as on 1st April, 2018."
The Commission had proposed as follows in the draft Regulations:
"(3) Interest on Working Capital shall be at interest rate equivalent to the average State Bank India(SBI) Marginal Cost of Funds based Lending Rate(MCLR)(one year tenor) prevailing during the last available six months plus 300 basis points."
"(3) Interest on Working Capital shall be at interest rate equivalent to the average State Bank India(SBI) Marginal Cost of Funds based Lending Rate(MCLR)(one year tenor) prevailing during the last available six months from the date of Petition plus 350 basis points."
The Commission had proposed as follows in the draft Regulations:
"(1) Operation and maintenance expenses for the year of commissioning shall be determined based on normative O&M expenses specified by the Commission under Chapter 5 for different technologies for the first Year of Control Period, i.e. for FY 2018-19. These expenses shall be escalated@ 5.72% p.a. to arrive at O&M expenses for the ensuing years.
(2) Normative O&M expenses allowed for the year of commissioning shall be escalated at the rate of 5.72% p.a. to determine the O&M expenses for the different years of the Tariff Period."
The Commission had proposed as follows in the draft Regulations:
“(1) The proceeds of carbon credit from approved CDM project shall be shared between generating company and concerned beneficiaries in the following manner, namely-
total amount of proceeds shall be remitted directly by the generating company to the distribution licensee for each financial year within one month of its receipt alongwith auditor's certification in accordance with above provisions."
The Commission had proposed as follows in the Draft Regulations:
In case the payment of bills is delayed beyond a period of 60 days from the date of billing, a late payment surcharge at the rate of 1.25% per month or part thereof shall be levied by the generating company."
1.26.2 These Regulations are applicable to renewable energy based generators with capacity ranging from few kW to few MWs. In case of relatively larger RE generators, the distribution licensee and the generators will be at parity for negotiation of the terms and conditions for the rebate and late payment surcharge. However, in case of the small capacity RE generators, distribution licensee will have an upper hand and may finalize terms and conditions as per its convenience which would be injustice to such small generators. Accordingly, the Commission finds it prudent to retain the provision in this regard of the draft regulation.
In the draft regulation, the Commission had proposed the 1st proviso as follows:
"Provided that only 75% of the capital subsidy for the financial year of commissioning as per applicable scheme of MNRE shall be considered for tariff determination."
1.27.1 M/s Harshil Hydro Ltd. and Mr. Madhav k. Kejriwal submitted that subsidy/incentive should be allowed to be retained by SHP developer as equity to compensate for the high risks and hurdles faced in implementing SHPs specifically in Uttarakhand.
1.27.2 The Commission is of the view that the subsidy is provided to the renewable sources to make their tariff viable so that they can compete in the market and hence, it is imperative to adjust the capital subsidy available to them for enabling their competitiveness in the market. In the existing Regulations, the developer has been allowed to retain 25% of the capital subsidy as an incentive and also to compensate it for the time and efforts expended by it on getting the subsidy released from the Government. Accordingly, no change is required in the said Regulation.
In the draft regulation, the Commission had proposed as follows:
"Tariff determined under these regulations shall be including direct taxes on income but
exclusive of other taxes and duties as may be levied by the appropriate Government.
Provided that the taxes, duties and cess levied by the appropriate Government other than direct taxes shall be allowed as pass through on actual incurred basis."
The Commission had proposed as follows in the draft Regulations:
"(A) For generators opting generic tariff:
(a)Till the actual CUF is less than or equal to annual CUF of 40%, tariffs would be payable at the levelised generic rates specified in the Regulations arrived at based on the normative CUF of 40%.
...
...
(B) For generators opting for project specific tariffs, the tariff for generation beyond the applicable CUF (i.e. the CUF envisaged in the approved DPR or the normative CUF specified for the relevant technology under Chapter 5, whichever is higher), when entire fixed cost has been recovered, shall be allowed to be recovered at the generic tariff specified by the Commission in the Regulations.
The annual CUF shall be calculated in accordance with the principles specified in Regulation 3(1)(h) of the Regulations."
passed and almost all the generating stations have revived and are not efficient enough are reaping undue benefits out of the reduced CUF and infact the same is not sufficiently stimulating the generators for improving their performance which would infact affect the interest of the State and lead to the wastage of the natural resources. Further, it can be observed from the available data that capacity utilization of the plants have increased and once again the stable generation has been reached, the generators having some inherent defect are struggling to achieve the requisite CUF, in this regard an enquiry can be set up to ascertain the real cause for lesser CUF. UPCL requested the Commission to consider the CUF of 55% as in Himachal Pradesh.
scenarios regarding incentive over and above specified CUF for developers opting for project specific tariff. The Commission observed that the generic tariff varies from control period to control period based on the capital cost and other technical parameters specified for RE plants. Generic Tariff may be higher or lower than the project specific tariff approved for such developers and it will be an anomaly to allow incentives more than the project specific tariff even when the entire fixed cost is recovered on achieving the applicable CUF. Further, as discussed under Para 1.2.3 and Para 1.17.4 above, the Commission has provided a provision for additional expenditure of capital nature which becomes necessary for restoration works and the levelised tariff to be approved by the Commission shall be project specific tariff in nature. Further, during the previous control period, developers have approached the Commission regarding incentive to be applicable on the levelised tariff determined by the Commission on additional capitalisation. Therefore, the Commission decides to insert a clause to remove the ambiguity in the matter. Accordingly, based on the discussions, the final Regulation shall be read as follows:
“(B) For generators opting for project specific tariffs, the tariff for generation beyond the applicable CUF (i.e. the CUF envisaged in the approved DPR or the normative CUF specified for the relevant technology under Chapter 5, whichever is higher), shall be allowed to be recovered at the project specific tariff approved by the Commission.
(C) For additional capitalization as allowed by the Commission for restoration work, the tariff for generation beyond the applicable CUF to the generating station shall be allowed to be recovered at the project specific tariff approved by the Commission for such restoration work.
The annual CUF shall be calculated in accordance with the principles specified in Regulation 3(1)(h) of the Regulations.”
In the draft regulation, Regulation 16(8) specifies as under:
“The technology specific parameters for determination of generic tariffs for Small Hydro Generating Stations commissioned or to be commissioned on or after 01.04.2018 of these regulations shall be as follows:
| Project Size | Capital Cost | O&M Expenses for year of commissioning | Capacity Utilization Factor* | Auxiliary Consumption |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Rs. Lakh/MW) | (Rs. Lakh/MW) | (%) | (%) | |
| Upto 5 MW | 1000 | 45.00 | Generic Tariff- 40% Project Specific- 45% |
1% |
| > 5 MW & upto 15 MW | 950 | 38.00 | ||
| > 15 MW & upto 25 MW | 900 | 31.50 |
* for the recovery of Annual Fixed Charges.
NOTE: For the purpose of this Regulation, normative CUF is based on Energy Sent Out at interconnection point and for tariff purposes energy net of free power to the home State, if any, committed by the developer shall be factored. For generic tariff determination, home State share has been taken as 18% from 16th year onwards."
| Project Size | Capital Cost | O&M Expenses for year of commissioning | Capacity Utilization factor | Auxiliary Consumption |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Rs. Lakh/MW) | (Rs. Lakh/MW) | (%) | (%) | |
| Up to 5 MW | 1400 | 75 (approx @ 5.5% of capital cost) |
Generic Tariff 40% Project Specific Tariff 45% |
1% |
| > 5 MW & upto 15 MW | 1350 | 60 (approx @ 4.5% of capital cost) |
||
| > 15 MW & upto 25 MW | 1250 | 50 (approx @ 4.0 % of capital cost) |
UJVN Ltd further proposed to provide a provision for 1% additional free power as pass through in tariff in new regulations as in line with the Hydropower policy, 2008, Government of Uttarakhand was in the process of formation and implementations of LADF management Policy under which additional 1% free power from the project proponent would be contributed for LADF.
developers in support of the capital cost.
| Capacity | Himachal Pradesh (Rs. Lakh/MW) |
Arunachal Pradesh (Rs. Lakh/MW) |
Assam (Rs. Lakh/MW) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Upto 500 kW MW | 880 | 1400 | 1000 |
| Above 500 kW to below 1 MW | 1200 | ||
| 1 kW to 2 MW | Project Specific | ||
| Above 2 MW to 5 MW | 850 | 900 | |
| Above 5 MW to 25 MW | 800 |
It can be observed from the above table, that the neighboring State, i.e. Himachal Pradesh has specified the benchmark capital cost lower than the capital cost proposed by this Commission and Assam ERC has specified benchmark capital cost as specified by Central Commission. Further, as per Section 61 of the Act, the State Commissions shall be guided by the principles and methodology specified by the Central Commission for tariff determination. Accordingly, the Commission does not find it prudent to change the capital Costs in the final Regulation.
Accordingly, Regulations shall apply based on the date of execution of PPA. Therefore, in this regard no change is required.
Accordingly, based on the above discussions, final Regulation shall be read as follows:
“The technology specific parameters for determination of generic tariffs for Small Hydro Generating Stations commissioned or to be commissioned on or 01.04.2018 shall be as follows:
| Project Size | Capital Cost | O&M Expenses for year of commissioning | Capacity Utilization Factor* | Auxiliary Consumption |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Rs. Lakh/MW) | (Rs. Lakh/MW) | (%) | (%) | |
| Upto 5 MW | 1000 | 45.00 | Generic Tariff- 40% Project Specific- 45% |
1% |
| > 5 MW & upto 15 MW | 950 | 40.38 | ||
| > 15 MW & upto 25 MW | 900 | 36.00 |
* for the recovery of Annual Fixed Charges.
NOTE: For the purpose of this Regulation, normative CUF is based on Energy Sent Out at interconnection point and for tariff purposes energy net of free power to the home State, if any, committed by the developer shall be factored. For generic tariff determination, home State share has been taken as 18% from 16th year onwards.”
In the draft regulation, the Commission had proposed as follows:
“Fuel Cost (P) for the first year of the Control Period, i.e. FY 2018-19 shall be taken as Rs. 1954/MT, unless specifically reviewed by the Commission. For the purpose of determining levelised tariff, a normative escalation factor of 5% per annum shall be applicable.”
| Financial Year | Percentage Increase/(Decrease) |
|---|---|
| 2012-13 | 8.94% |
| 2013-14 | 7.35% |
| 2014-15 | 5.98% |
| 2015-16 | 2.01% |
| 2016-17 | -2.50% |
| 2017-18 | 3.69% |
| Average | 4.25% |
Further, CERC has also specified a 5% increase in its RE Regulations, 2017. Moreover, the life of the Non-fossil fuel cogeneration project is 20 years and it is also evident from the above table that five years average increase in WPI has been about 4.25% in this regard. Accordingly, the Commission does not find it prudent to change the percentage of normative escalation factor in this regard.
In the draft regulation, the Commission had proposed as follows:
“The technology specific parameters for determination of generic tariffs for Biomass Gasifier Power Projects commissioned or to be commissioned on or after 01.04.2018 shall be as follows:
| Capital Cost | O&M Expenses for year of commissioning | Specific Fuel Consumption | Auxiliary Consumption | Capacity Utilization Factor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Rs. Lakh/MW) | (Rs. Lakh/MW) | (kg/kWh) | ||
| 592.88 | 55.85 | 1.25 | 10% | 85% |
“
harnessed.
by the developer as it is the only developer in this field and it has constructed limited plants only where the cost of gasifier varies from plant to plant having same capacity of 10 kW.
“(1) The technology specific parameters for determination of generic tariffs for Biomass Gasifier Power Projects commissioned or to be commissioned on or after 01.04.2018 shall be as follows:
| Type of Project | Capital Cost (Rs. Lakh/ MW) |
O&M Expenses for year of commissioning (Rs. Lakh/MW) |
Specific Fuel Consumption |
Auxiliary Consumption |
Capacity Utilization Factor |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kg/kWh | |||||
| Pine leaves based Biomass Gasifier projects | 625.00 | 100.00 | 1.50 | 10% | 85% |
| Other Biomass Gasifier Projects | 592.88 | 55.85 | 1.25 |
(2) Fuel Price (P) for the first year of the Control Period, i.e. FY 2018-19 shall be taken as Rs. 2355/MT for all type of Biomass Gasifier based power projects, unless specifically reviewed by the Commission. For each subsequent year of the Tariff Period, the normative escalation factor of 5% on previous year's fuel cost shall be applicable to determine the fuel cost for different years of the Tariff Period.
In the draft regulation, the Commission had proposed Regulation 33, i.e. Solar PV Power Project, as follows:
“Norms for Solar Photovoltaic (PV) power under these Regulations shall be applicable for grid connected PV systems that directly convert solar energy into electricity and are based on the
technologies such as crystalline silicon or thin film etc. as may be approved by MNRE. The technology specific parameters for determination of generic tariffs for Solar PV Power Projects commission or to be commissioned on or after 01.04.2018 shall be as follows:
| Capital Cost | O&M Expenses for year of commissioning | Capacity Utilization Factor |
|---|---|---|
| (Rs. Lakh/MW) | (Rs. Lakh/MW) | |
| 387.91 | 12.30 | 19 % |
“
In the draft regulation, the Commission had proposed Regulation 36, i.e. Grid interactive rooftop and small solar PV plants, as follows:
“(1) The technology specific parameters for determination of generic tariff for Grid interactive rooftop and small solar PV plants shall be as below:
| Projects Commissioned on or after 01.04.2018 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Capital Cost | O&M Expenses for year of commissioning | Capacity Utilization Factor |
| (Rs. Lakh/MW) | (Rs. Lakh/MW) | |
| 390.58 | 11.63 | 19 % |
(2) Roof-top Solar PV sources can be installed for injecting into the distribution system of a licensee by any Eligible consumer.
Provided that the maximum Rooftop Solar PV capacity to be installed at any Eligible Consumer's premises except Domestic Consumers shall be upto a maximum of 50% of consumer's sanctioned load/contract demand; whereas in case of domestic Consumers, the Rooftop Solar PV capacity shall be irrespective of their sanctioned load/contract demand.
Provided, the maximum installed capacity of rooftop PV solar power plant & small solar PV plant at the premises of eligible consumer shall not be more than 500 kW.
(3) Injection from roof-top solar PV sources owned by the Eligible consumer(s) or by third party shall be settled on net energy basis at the end of each Billing period.
(4) The tariff, as per tariff orders of the Commission, in respect of the supply of electricity to the consumers by the distribution licensee shall be applicable for the net energy supplied by the licensee in a billing period if the supplied energy by the licensee is more than the energy injected by the roof-top solar PV sources of the consumer(s) or by third party.
Provided further that no open access charges including surcharges shall be leviable on such eligible consumers for the captive use of power.
(5) If in a billing period the supplied energy by the licensee is less than the energy injected by the roof-top solar PV sources of the consumer(s) or the third party, subject to provisions in sub-Regulation (3) above, the licensee would be billed at the generic tariff as may be specified by the
Commission or at the rate discovered through tariff based bidding process whichever is lower for such net energy supplied to it."
projects in which surplus power is not allowed to be billed at any tariff (e.g. projects installed under SECI scheme) the settlement period should be financial year.
| S. No. | State | Capacity Cap | Cap as per sanctioned load |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Uttar Pradesh | 1000 kWp | 100% |
| 2 | Haryana | 1000 kWp | 100% |
| 3 | Delhi | No cap | Can exceed sanctioned load |
| 4 | Bihar | 1000 kWp | 100% |
| 5 | Maharashtra | 1000 kWp | 100% |
| 6 | Madhya Pradesh | 2000 kWp | 100% |
| 7 | Himachal Pradesh | 1000 kWp | 80% |
| 8 | Punjab | 1000 kWp | 80% |
the Solar roof- top plants at the tail-end of the grid contributes to a significant reduction on transmission & distribution losses. Consequently, the Commission may increase or decrease the level of penetration and issue renewable energy penetration limits to overall grid level to ensure grid stability. So, the Commission should promote Rooftop solar capacity up to 100% of sanctioned load for all level of consumer without any discrimination for improving local DISCOM losses.
“3.6 ...
Further, the Petitioner has submitted that to achieve the objectives of the policy for increasing solar power generation, the regulatory framework should allow the solar power developers to establish and develop rooftop solar power plants of any size without any limits on the installed solar capacity for widespread acceptability of rooftop solar PV system across a large group of consumers. In this regard, it is to be noted that the Commission has put a ceiling for the grid interactive rooftop and small solar PV plants in case of net metering only and reasoning for the
same has already been given in above paras of this Order. However, the Commission is of the view that the cap/ceiling on the installed capacity for grid connected rooftop small solar PV plant as provided in Regulation 35 shall not be applicable in case the generation from such plant, which is either a generating plant or a captive generating plant, is entirely for captive consumption by the industry/consumer in whose premises such solar plant is installed and no any generation whether balance/ surplus/residual is fed or allowed to be fed in to the licensee's grid. Accordingly, the Commission vide its Order dated 20.06.2018, taking cognizance of the Section 10 read with Section 42 of the Act, 2003, has allowed M/s Amplus Solar Power Pot. Ltd to supply entire power from its 3.60 MW capacity rooftop solar PV plant established on the rooftop of M/s Asahi India Glass Ltd. (Industry consumer) to be consumed by it without any injection of power into the grid.
3.7 The Petitioner, referring to the Regulations & Orders issued by other States, submitted that there is no such capping on the installed capacity of rooftop solar PV plants in other States. The Petitioner also submitted that the imposition of an absolute restriction based on the capacity of the roof-top solar plant without any basis is arbitrary & unreasonable and such an approach would not be consistent with the principles enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
It is to be noted that regulations are issued by the State Electricity Regulatory Commission's based on the geographical conditions, consumer mix, policies framed at State/ Central Government level and taking cognizance of other factors within the State...."
Hence, the above issue is not required to be dealt in the Regulation as the aforesaid regulation is for grid connected rooftop power plants on net metering basis. Such request is to be dealt in accordance with Order dated 27.06.2018 in the matter of M/s Distributed Solar Power Association & M/s Amplus Solar Power (P) Ltd. v/s UPCL & UREDA.
In this regard, Secretary, MNRE, GoI vide its letter dated 18.07.2018 had requested the Commission to modify the Net-metering Regulations and specify SoP to facilitate promotion of rooftop solar. Vide the said letter it was submitted that the PV system capacity may be permitted upto 100% of the connected load and the limit of 1 MW capacity for rooftop may be increased to 2 MW. Further, the Ministry submitted
that if the DT capacity is limited, the discom should increase the capacity of transformer accordingly and the consumers should not be denied permission on this account to set up a solar rooftop system.
However, taking cognizance of the development in the field of rooftop plants and capping of installed capacity of rooftop and small solar PV plants specified by other SERCs in the country, the Commission is of the view to increase maximum rooftop Solar PV capacity to be installed at any eligible consumer's premises except Domestic Consumers from 50% to 80% of the consumer's sanctioned load and also increase the capping limit from 500 kW to 1 MW for the purpose of net metering. Further, the distribution licensee is advised to augment the transformer capacity in its sub-station to facilitate installation of solar rooftop plants and submit its plan in this regard within 3 months of the date of notification of these regulations. Based on the preparedness of the licensee, the Commission will separately take a view in increasing the capacity of the solar rooftop plants and also in removing the cap on connected/sanctioned load.
Considering the submissions of stakeholders and also the fact that the Commission has revised the cap of capacity upto 1 MW for grid interactive rooftop and small solar PV plants under the net metering arrangement and mostly such plants shall be of smaller capacity, the Commission decides to categorize the benchmark capital cost and other technical parameters for such plants having capacity upto 10 kW, above 10 kW to 100 kW, above 100 kW upto 500 kW and above 500 kW & upto 1 MW.
The Commission, in the past has approved the benchmark Capital Cost of Rs. 6.68 Crore/MW, Rs. 5.88 Crore/MW and Rs. 4.19 Crore/MW for FY 2015-16, FY 2016-17 and FY 2017-18. The Commission notes that the capital cost of solar PV modules has decreased significantly during the last twelve months. During FY 2016-17, the average cost of module was USD 0.48/Wp which has now decreased to USD 0.27/Wp (source: www.pvinsights.com dated 18.07.2018). The Commission observed that CERC vide its RE Regulations, 2017 has specified that levelised tariff for Solar PV power plant shall be determined on project specific basis. Further, in line with the decision taken by CERC, other State Regulatory Commissions, such as Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Chhattisgarh has also specified in their respective RE Regulations that project specific levelised tariff shall be determined for Solar PV based projects. Further, Karnataka, Himachal Pradesh and Maharashtra have determined the generic levelised tariff for Solar PV plants. Following is the summary of the capital cost considered by various states:
| State | Benchmark Capital Cost |
|---|---|
| Assam | Project Specific |
| Arunachal Pradesh | |
| Chhattisgarh | |
| Bihar | In Draft Stage: Less than 5 MW- 442.18 Lakh/MW More than 5 MW- Project Specific |
| Himachal Pradesh | In Draft Stage: Upto 1 MW – 432.40 Lakh/MW 1 MW to 5 MW – 426 Lakh/MW Above 5 MW- Project Specific |
| Karnataka | For Rooftop plants – Rs. 40,000/kW For Ground mounted- Rs. 3.50 Crore/MW |
| Maharashtra | In Draft Stage: For Solar PV plants- Rs. 262 Lakh/MW For Rooftop plants- generic Tariff Rs. 3.21/kWh |
From the above table, it can be seen that only Karnataka has finalized the benchmark capital cost and provided the capital cost on per kW basis whereas other States are still in the process of finalization of the benchmark capital cost and generic tariff. For FY 2018-19, the Commission has considered the average module cost from Jan, 2018 to March, 2018, i.e. USD 0.317/Wp and exchange rate of Rs. 65.71/USD and degradation of 0.5% for the purpose of determination of module cost which works out to Rs. 226.94 Lakh/MW. Further, the Commission has followed the methodology as adopted in Order dated 03.08.2017 for the determination of Capital cost for Solar PV plants and Rooftop & small solar PV plants (above 500 kW to 1 MW) which works out
to Rs. 388.19 Lakh/MW and Rs. 39135/kW respectively. Further, for the purpose of determination of benchmark capital cost for rooftop & small solar PV plants having capacity upto 10 kW, above 10 kW to 100 kW and above 100 kW to 500 kW, the Commission has proportionately increased the capital cost for aforementioned slabs on the basis of Office Memorandum dated 15.06.2018 of MNRE which lays down the benchmark costs for off-grid Solar PV systems and grid connected rooftop solar Power plants for FY 2016-17.
1.33.11 With regard to the CUF, it is to be noted that as per the previous regulations, it is the responsibility of the RE based generating companies to submit the information to the Commission in respect to generation, demand met, capacity availability, capacity utilization factor, auxiliary consumption and other parameters on yearly basis. However, no information has been submitted by any of the developer or nodal agency. The MNRE report on Performance analysis of Grid connected solar power projects commissioned in year 2014 is not relevant as the report pertains to FY 2015-16. No current/latest data has been submitted by any of the agency or developer. Further, CERC has specified the CUF of 19% based on the CUF specified by various SERCs and bidding documents issued by various agencies including SECI for competitive bidding and inviting project Developers and Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPC) companies to setup and construct solar PV projects. Accordingly, the Commission does not find it prudent to change the CUF.
1.33.12 With regard to the comments M/s ADOS Renewable (P) Ltd. it is to be noted that for the purpose of net metering, the developer may procure meter subject to fulfillment of the specification laid down under CEA (Installation & Operation of Meters), Regulations, 2006 and provided that testing of such meter will be done by UPCL. Further, on the request of beneficiaries of SECI scheme that adjustment of generation should be done on yearly basis instead of monthly billing cycle basis, the Commission of the view that this proposal needs to be analysed before taking any decision in this regard and accordingly, the Commission directs UPCL to collect monthly generation as well as consumption data, of such SECI and other schemes' beneficiaries who do not have PPA with UPCL and are supplying excess power to UPCL free of cost, for atleast one complete year and submit the same before the Commission for taking further view in the matter. Further, such SECI scheme beneficiaries also raised the
issue of delay in meter testing, in this regard, UPCL should expedite all the procedures from the procurement to installation of meters at consumers place so that consumers can avail the benefit of various schemes issued by Central/State Governments and UPCL can meet its RPO requirement by way of excess Renewable Energy exported to grid.
1.33.13 Further, in the recent past many developers have approached the Commission seeking clarification on regulation of Uttarakhand Solar Power Policy-Rooftop, for setting up Solar PV power Project into the premises for 100% captive consumption. In this regard, the Electricity Act, 2003 allows the generating company or person to construct, maintain or operate a captive generating plant and dedicated transmission lines and such plants will be commissioned for captive use only, accordingly, all the Rooftop Solar PV plants & small Solar PV plants having capacity of more than 1 MW can be installed by any consumer as a captive generating plant within the definition and other terms & conditions provided in the Electricity Act, 2003 and the Electricity Rules, 2005 prescribed therein.
1.33.14 Accordingly, based on the above discussion, Regulation 33 and Regulation 36 shall be read as follows:
“Norms for Solar Photovoltaic (PV) power project under these Regulations shall be applicable for grid connected PV systems that directly convert solar energy into electricity and are based on the technologies such as crystalline silicon or thin film etc. as may be approved by MNRE. The technology specific parameters for determination of generic tariffs for Solar PV Power Projects commission or to be commissioned on or after 01.04.2018 shall be as follows:
| Capital Cost | O&M Expenses for year of commissioning | Capacity Utilization Factor |
|---|---|---|
| (Rs. Lakh/MW) | (Rs. Lakh/MW) | |
| 388.19 | 12.30 | 19 % |
“
“(1) The technology specific parameters for determination of generic tariff for Grid interactive Roof Top and Small Solar PV plants commissioned or to be commission on or after 01.04.2018 shall be as below:
| Project Size | Capital Cost | O&M Expenses for year of commissioning | Capacity Utilization Factor |
|---|---|---|---|
| (Rs./kW) | (Rs./kW) |
| Upto 10 kW | 47153 | 1627 | 19 % |
| >10 kW & upto 100 kW | 43224 | 1448 | |
| >100 kW & upto 500 kW | 40612 | 1320 | |
| >500 kW and upto 1 MW | 39135 | 1230 |
(2) Grid Interactive Roof-top and small solar PV plants can be installed for injecting power into the distribution system of a licensee by any Eligible consumer:
Provided that the maximum Rooftop Solar PV and Small Solar PV plants installed capacity at any Eligible Consumer's premises shall be upto a maximum of 80% of consumer's sanctioned load/contract demand;
Provided that in case of Domestic Consumer, such installed capacity of Roof Top and Small Solar PV Plants shall be irrespective of consumer's sanctioned load/contract demand.
Provided, the maximum installed capacity of rooftop PV solar power plant & small solar PV plant at the premises of eligible consumer shall not be more than 1 MW.
(3) Injection from Roof-Top Solar PV plant owned by the Eligible consumer or by third party shall be settled on Net Energy basis at the end of each Billing period.
(4) The tariff, as per tariff orders of the Commission, in respect of the supply of electricity to the consumers by the distribution licensee shall be applicable for the Net Energy supplied by the licensee in a billing period if the supplied energy by the licensee is more than the energy injected by the Roof-Top Solar PV plant of the consumer or by third party:
Provided that such eligible consumer shall be exempted from payment of monthly minimum charges/monthly minimum consumption guarantee charges, if any, equivalent to the capacity of Roof Top Solar PV plant installed at the premises;
Provided further that no open access charges including surcharges shall be leviable on such eligible consumers for the captive use of power.
(5) If in a billing period the supplied energy by the licensee is less than the energy injected by the Roof-Top Solar PV Plant of the consumer or the third party, subject to provisions in sub-Regulation (3) above, the licensee would be billed at the generic tariff as may be specified by the Commission or at the rate discovered through tariff based bidding process whichever is lower for such Net Energy supplied to it."
The Commission had proposed as follows in the Draft Regulations:
"No fuel cost shall be considered for determination of tariff for the power projects using municipal solid waste."
In the draft regulation, the Commission had proposed as follows:
“(1) Transmission Licensees and Distribution Licensees shall endeavor to provide connectivity to the RE Based Generating Stations and Co-generating Stations at nearest possible sub-station preferably within a range of 10 kilometers from the location of such generating station. They may further mutually agree to provide connectivity at appropriate voltage level subject to technical feasibility and technical standards for construction of electrical lines and connectivity with the grid as may be specified by CEA.”
suitable place in proposed RE Regulations, 2018 as the Commission may deem fit.
“(a) to undertake transmission of electricity through intra-State transmission system;
...
(c) to ensure development of an efficient, co-ordinated and economical system of intra-State transmission lines for smooth flow of electricity from a generating station to the load centres;"
Hence, from the above readings of the provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003 which lays down the functions of the State Transmission Utility, it is evident that the STU is responsible for transmission of electricity as well as development of an efficient, co-ordinated and economical system of intra-State transmission lines for smooth flow of electricity from a generating station to the load centres. However, in the recent past it has been observed that required evacuation of power from the RE generating stations could not be taken up due to lack of transmission system in the vicinity of RE generators. In this regard, PTCUL is directed to submit its transmission plan for the next 5 years alongwith the current status of various lines/sub-stations under execution within 1 month. The Commission has decided to review the status of works being executed by PTCUL on quarterly basis and accordingly, PTCUL is directed to submit the quarterly status of various projects under execution within ten days of the end of each quarter.
UJVN Ltd. in its comments had requested for a provision in the regulations regarding allowance of cost escalation when the generating station is ready for commissioning but due to non-availability of evacuation system the generating station cannot achieve COD and remains idle. In this regard, the generators and licensees (both Transmission licensee and Distribution licensee) are advised to discuss amongst them the issue and devise a suitable condition/clause in the PPA/TSA specifying the liability of either parties in one case where the generating station is ready for commissioning but due to non-availability of proper evacuation system the generating station is unable to achieve COD and is lying idle and in other case where construction of generating station is delayed while the evacuation infrastructure is completed and ready to evacuate generation. Taking cognizance of the comments of PTCUL, the Commission decides to change the Regulation 41 as follows:
"(1) Distribution Licensees shall provide connectivity to the RE Based Generating Stations having capacity upto 25 MW at its nearest sub-station preferably within a range of 10 kilometers from the location of such generating station. They may further mutually agree to provide connectivity at appropriate voltage level subject to technical feasibility and technical standards for construction of electrical lines and connectivity with the grid as may be specified by CEA.
(2) Transmission Licensee shall provide connectivity to the RE Based Generating Stations having installed capacity more than 25 MW, at its nearest transmission sub-station preferably within a range of 10 kilometers from the location of such generating station. They may further mutually agree to provide connectivity at appropriate voltage level subject to technical feasibility and technical standards for construction of electrical lines and connectivity with the grid as may be specified by CEA:
Provided that any RE based Generating Station having capacity upto 25 MW is willing to connect and evacuate power through 132 kV & above transmission system, it may do so subject to consent of the Transmission Licensee.
Provided further that where more than one RE based Generating Stations having cumulative installed capacity more than 25 MW are located in a cluster/area and for the purpose of evacuation, these generating stations agree to pool their generation at a common pooling switching station to be constructed by them at their own cost and further beyond such pooling switching station, the Transmission Licensee shall provide connectivity at its nearest sub-station. They may further mutually agree to provide connectivity at appropriate voltage level subject to technical feasibility and technical standards for construction of electricity lines and connectivity with the grid as may be specified by CEA.
(3) In case RE based Generating Stations exercise the option to construct the evacuation system including the line upto the nearest substation of Transmission/Distribution Licensee, the required bay, terminal equipments, associated synchronization equipments and above pooling switching station, if any, etc. the cost of such evacuation system shall be borne by such generating stations:
Provided that such Generating Stations may also get the work of construction of the power evacuation system carried out by State transmission/distribution licensee;
Provided further that the land for extending the bay shall be provided by the owner of the transmission or distribution sub-station, as the case may be, free of cost."
The Commission had proposed as follows in the Draft Regulations:
"Provided, Check Meter and related equipments can be procured by such plant owner. However, the cost of Check Meter shall be refunded by the licensee to such plant owner."
"Provided, Check Meter and related equipments can be procured by such plant owner. However, the cost of Check Meter shall be refunded by the licensee to such plant owner. The cost of the check meter to be refunded would be, lower of the following:
a. Actual cost of meter; or
b. Highest rate discovered through Competitive Bidding Process of licensee escalated by 25% "
In the draft Regulation, the Commission had proposed as follows:
"The State Load Dispatch Centre shall carry out scheduling and accounting of energy sent out by the generators and the same shall be communicated to the utilities interacting with the grid as per the scheme framed by SLDC in pursuance of the provisions of IEGC, State Grid Code and Open Access Regulations. Billing for open access transactions shall be done in accordance with the Open Access Regulations.
Provided that in case of sale to the distribution licensee of the area, the power purchase agreement may provide for joint metering and in such cases, energy accounting and billing shall
be done by the generating station in association with the concerned distribution licensee.”
In the draft Regulation, the Commission had proposed as follows:
“(Applicable only in case of Small Hydro Generating Plants & Solar PV & Solar Thermal Projects)
(1) After the COD of the Project, loss of generation at the Station on account of reasons attributed to the following, or any one of the following, shall count towards Deemed Generation:
Non availability of evacuation system beyond the Interconnection Point; and*
Receipt of backing down instructions from the SLDC.*
Provided that the following shall not count towards Deemed Generation:
(2) The distribution licensee shall be required to maintain the voltages at the point of interconnection with the project within the limits stipulated hereunder, with reference to declared voltage:
With effect from 01.04.2018, any loss in generation due to variations in the voltage beyond the limits specified above shall be reckoned as deemed generation provided such loss of generation results in reduction of more than 25% of capacity output.
(3) xxx
(4) The distribution licensee shall pay for the saleable deemed generation, on annual basis, for small hydro projects and solar PV and solar thermal projects worked out on the basis of the deemed generation on the above lines, at the generic/project specific tariffs under the provisions of RE Regulations, as amended from time to time by the Commission. The settlement of payment towards deemed generation charges shall be carried out within 3 months of the completion of the financial year.
Any charges paid by the distribution licensee towards deemed generation shall not be allowed as an expense to be pass through in tariffs. The distribution licensee will have to bear such charges"
1.38.1 UPCL submitted that the outages/interruptions allowed within which no deemed generation is permitted is drastically reduced from 60 hours in a month in present Regulations to 50 hrs. in a year. The proposed limit is very harsh on distribution utility especially considering that in preceding years no such issue related to interruption were raised by any of the generator. Many generators have installed their plants during the currency of previous regulations and were attracted towards the State with existing regulation specifying a limit of 60 hrs. in a month. It is not understandable that whether the same are proposed to facilitate the existing generators or to attract the new generators in the State because in either situation the same is not going to help considering that none of the existing generators even approached UPCL regarding any issue related with deemed generation and no inquiry for new plant raising any such query has been received. The Commission would appreciate that the proposed duration is totally impractical as in the existing situation it is almost impossible to not
have even one breakdown in the month, further the time required to attend a single breakdown considering the diverse topography and the distance of the line cannot be done within 4 hrs. in every situation. UPCL has improved the distribution network over the years and the benefits of the same has automatically being passed on to the consumers and generators of the State but it does not make any merit of imposing more stringent regulations.
UPCL also submitted that maintaining voltage is important but is also very tricky and complicated at times considering the voltage as per regulations is to be maintained at the interconnection point while the real time voltage at interconnection point is not visible at the concerned sub-station end and one can only speculate the same by considering the voltage available at the sub-station end. There are sub-stations which feed different generating stations through various lines of varied lengths and there are situations when at a given voltage of sub-station end there are different voltages across interconnection points at different lines and managing the voltages of all the plants simultaneously is a complex task. Moreover, the same sub-stations feed the adjoining areas for providing the power supply and any measure taken for correction of voltage at interconnection point may adversely affect the voltages available at the consumer end. Further, the deemed generation clause invokes for as small a period of 15 minutes while practically it is not always possible to micromanage the voltage fluctuations occurring for such small period especially when various generators and load centers are connected simultaneously to the sub-station and dependency on transmission counterpart. Further, sub-station capacitor, reactors etc are temporary and non-sufficient solutions considering that online switching involves heavy expenditure and infrastructure and generator also influence the voltage of line and grid and also affect other generators in close network. Accordingly, the provisioned voltage limit should be allowed to be maintained at the sub-station end rather the interconnection point or extra cushion should be provisioned over and above the prescribed voltage limit at interconnection point. Further, generators should also be made accountable with regard to their efforts in maintaining the voltage which actually is affected due to their connectivity with the grid.
1.38.2 M/s Himalaya Hydro (P) Ltd. submitted that the Regulations, as currently framed,
appear to assume that high voltage conditions are a short-term phenomenon within a 24 hour period. However, voltage remains high every time during monsoon season which is our peak generation season. Motighat and Tanga hydro generating stations evacuate over the same 33 kV transmission line, during monsoon they rarely reach their full rated capacity of 5 MW each due to high voltage. UPCL refuses to pay deemed generation citing some problems related to PTCUL. If UPCL is unable to evacuate power or maintain voltage due to reasons beyond its control, then deemed generation could be made a pass through cost as it is done in other cases, because otherwise the entire financial loss is being borne solely by the Generator.
1.38.3 M/s Avani Bio Power (P) Ltd. submitted that the said clause on deemed generation does not include biomass gasification systems. Setting up of pine needle based biomass gasification systems has the potential of generating large scale rural employment and so save biodiversity in the fragile Himalayan eco-system. The Stakeholder requested to grant deemed generation to pine needle based power generation systems which will make the operations viable for micro-entrepreneurs. The Stakeholder also submitted that in case of Uttarakhand, the problem arising out of burning of pine needles is much more severe as, apart from causing air pollution during the fire season, it is causing biodiversity loss leading to a slow and steady ecological disaster. The Stakeholder submitted that awarding a higher tariff for small, pine needle based power plants between 10 kW and 40 kW, is a way of incentivizing micro-entrepreneurs in setting up such power plants paving way for not only saving fragile Himalayan eco-system, but also providing large scale employment in rural areas to stop outmigration of youth, a burning issue for the state of Uttarakhand with many reported ghost villages.
1.38.4 M/s Harshil Hydro Ltd. submitted that the current exclusion of 48 hours in a month corresponds to 576 hours in a year i.e. 6.57% of PLF excluded from deemed generation. With the loss of revenue in case of non evacuation of power and exclusion from deemed generation upto 48 hours in a month, the revenue from assumed 45% PLF for Levelised Generic Tariff cannot be met, and viability of the SHPs will be eroded.
1.38.5 M/s Birahi Ganga Hydro Power Ltd. submitted that unstable voltage and frequent grid failures are not only causing revenue loss to the plant but also increasing the wear and tear of the machines. Therefore, a more stringent deemed generation regulation is required so as to incentivize UPCL to enhance the stability of the grid.
1.38.6 M/s Emami Power Ltd. submitted that there appears to be an ambiguity as to the availability of the benefits of this regulation to the Solar Plant commissioned prior to April 01, 2018. It is therefore respectfully submitted before the Commission to remove the ambiguity so that benefit of deemed generation provided under Regulations 49 of these Regulations could be made available to the Solar Plants commissioned prior to 1st April, 2018 who have signed PPA with UPCL.
"It is also worthwhile to mention here that most of the solar PV plants have been installed in the State in the plain region, where such problem should not have occurred but if is occurring then it clearly reflects poor planning and negligence on the part of UPCL who having signed the PPAs with these Solar generators, however, did not even bother to review evacuation system including its interconnecting distribution system as to whether it was capable of reliable evacuation of power from these generators which would result not only in generation and revenue loss to the generators but also will have implication on UPCL towards meeting the RPO shortfall. Since, half of the Financial Year is almost over and also keeping in view the existing system of UPCL, the Commission if of the view that it would be reasonable to allow UPCL some time to upgrade/augment its system.
The Commission will take a view in the matter in its subsequent MYT Regulations which will be notified before the end of this Financial Year. UPCL is, accordingly, advised to take note of the same and take effective steps to ensure that its system is adequately strengthened/augmented before the end of this financial year so that it is not burdened by payment of deemed generation charges and also of consequent shortfall in its solar RPO."
UPCL's contention that the proposed limit was very harsh on distribution utility especially considering that in preceding years no such issue related to interruption were raised by any of the generator is incorrect. Based on the comments received from the solar generators the Commission had dealt with the issue in the previous Amendment Regulations as discussed above. The proposed limit of 60 hours in a month will equally apply to the existing generators as well as the new generators in the State. The Commission in the past had allowed sufficient time to UPCL to upgrade its network, however, it seems that no concrete steps have been taken by UPCL in this regard. Further, as almost half of the year would elapse prior to notification of the Regulations, and disputes would arise regarding pro-rata applicability of the limit of 60 hours in a year, the Commission decides to make the ceiling of 60 hours applicable from 01.04.2019. Further, most of the solar PV plants are in plain areas, hence, it would not be too difficult for UPCL to augment its network and facilitate uninterrupted evacuation of power.
is also important to have a sound evacuation system for the plants connected to LT. As the distribution licensee is aware of the location of the plant at the time of signing of the PPA, it would be appropriate for distribution licensee to strengthen the evacuation system accordingly of that block so that the power generated from such plant can be supplied which would in return will help the distribution licensee to meet its RPO. Accordingly, the Commission does not find it prudent to change the provision of the said regulation in this regard. However, the Commission directs UPCL to strengthen the evacuation system of that particular area where such plants are connected or proposed to be connected.
1.38.10 M/s Himalaya Hydro (P) Ltd., M/s Birahi Ganda Hydro Power Ltd. and M/s Harshil Hydro Ltd. raised the issue of unstable voltage and frequent grid failure. The Stakeholders also submitted that high voltage conditions are not a short-term phenomenon. Voltage remains high every time during monsoon season which is peak generation time for SHPs. In this regard, the Commission in its SOR to UERC (Tariff and Other Terms for Supply of Electricity from Renewable Energy Sources and non-fossil fuel based Co-generating Stations) (First Amendment) Regulations, 2012 had held as under:
(1) Regarding the issue of voltage fluctuations raised by the generators, the Commission recognises that the problem of voltage fluctuations in UPCL's system is rampant which often causes generation loss. This issue was also discussed by the Commission during the meeting with senior officers of UPCL. They admitted that this problem exists because of the evacuation lines running for long distances, improper load management and also due to poor upkeep and maintenance of the equipments installed at the sub-stations. The Commission accepted the submission of UPCL, however, UPCL was instructed to maintain their equipments properly and also to ensure installation of capacitor banks at the sub-stations, wherever required, so as to ensure that voltage fluctuations does not lead to generation loss. It is the duty of UPCL to ensure that it gets maximum generation so as to meet its Renewable Purchase Obligation (RPO) specified by the Commission failing which it may be required to buy the Renewable Energy Certificates to meet the shortfall in complying with its RPO. Hence, the Commission feels it necessary to include loss of generation due to voltage fluctuation as deemed generation. However, keeping in view the existing system of UPCL, the Commission is of the view that it would be feasible to give UPCL reasonable time to upgrade/strengthen the system and also to
install the capacitor banks at its sub-stations. The same was also agreed to by the officers of UPCL in the meeting with the Commission. Accordingly, the Commission has decided to enable the provision with regard to deemed generation on account of voltage fluctuations w.e.f. 01.04.2013."
Despite more than 5 years in the matter has elapsed, the problem of voltage fluctuation persists which is due to inadequate planning by both UPCL as well as PTCUL to evacuate power from the generating stations. Hence, the Commission, taking the cognizance of the submission of the stakeholders regarding the voltage issue, decides to insert a proviso under clause (iii)(a) of sub-Regulation (3) of Regulation 49 of these Regulations. According, Regulations 49 shall be read as follows:
"
(1) After the COD of the Project, loss of generation at the Station on account of reasons attributed to the following, or any one of the following, shall count towards Deemed Generation:
Provided that the following shall not count towards Deemed Generation:
(2) The distribution licensee shall be required to maintain the voltages at the point of interconnection with the project within the limits stipulated hereunder, with reference to declared voltage:
Any loss in generation due to variations in the voltage beyond the limits specified above shall be reckoned as deemed generation provided such loss of generation results in reduction of more than 25% of capacity output.
(3) The period of outage/interruption on account of such factor(s) specified in sub-Regulation 1 and 2 above, shall be reconciled on monthly basis and the loss of generation at the station towards Deemed Generation after accounting for the events specified under sub-Regulation 1 (i) & (ii) above, shall be computed on following considerations:
(i) The recovery on the above account shall be admissible if the actual energy generated during the year is less than the normative CUF specified in the Regulation for small hydro projects and Solar PV and solar thermal projects (in case of project opting for generic tariff) or the CUF considered for recovery of fixed charges (in case of project specific tariff is applicable) for small hydro projects and solar PV and solar thermal projects. In case the sum of actual energy generated and the deemed generation during the year exceeds the CUF at which the recovery of fixed charges has been envisaged, then the deemed generation alongwith the actual energy generated will be allowed only upto the CUF considered.
(ii) The generation loss towards the Deemed Generation in accordance with sub-Regulation (1) above, if any, during the month shall be considered on the pro-rata basis on the number of hours lost based on the actual average generation achieved during that month divided by the total number of hours available during the month reduced by the number of hours outage/interruption occurred in the system.
(iii) The generation loss towards the Deemed Generation (in MWh) in accordance with sub-Regulation (2) above, if any, during the month shall be considered as the summation of the product of number of hours the variations in voltage beyond the specified limit existed and the Generation lost (in MW) due to the variation in the voltage beyond the specified limit. The Generation lost (in MW) would be the difference between the following:
(a) Minimum of the generation (in MW) before the variation in voltage occurred and
the generation (in MW) achieved after 90 minutes immediately after variation in voltage was restored within the specified limit would be treated as the "Actual Generation" during the period when voltage variations occurred; and
Provided that if such variation in voltage continues for the entire month, generation (in MW) before such variation in voltage occurrence would be treated as the "Actual Generation"
(b) The generation achieved during the period when variation in voltages took place.
Provided that any charges paid by the distribution licensee towards deemed generation shall not be allowed as an expense to be pass through in tariffs. The distribution licensee will have to bear such charges;
Provided further that the deemed generation conditions stipulated above shall be applicable only on those Small Hydro projects and Solar PV and Solar Thermal projects who have signed a long term PPA with the distribution licensee;
Provided also that the deemed generation conditions shall be applicable only on the Small Hydro projects and Solar PV and Solar Thermal projects where the evacuation line is connected to 11 kV or higher voltage Grid Sub-station."
"Provided that if such variation in voltage continues for the entire month, actual generation (in MW) before such variation in voltage occurrence would be treated as the actual generation during the period when voltage variation occurred."
| Sr. No. | Name | Designation | Organisation | Address |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Sh. Mohan Krishna Kejriwal | Managing Director | M/s Harsil Hydro Ltd. | Kishori Niwas, Birhana Road, Kanpur-208001, Uttar Pradesh |
| 2. | Sh. M.R. Ghosh | Whole-time Director | M/s Emami Power Ltd. | 687, Anandapur, E.M. Byapass, Kolkata-700 107 |
| 3. | Sh. Rajnish Jain | CEO/Founder | M/s Avani Bio Energy Pvt. Ltd. | PO Tripuradevi, via Berinag, Distt. Pithoragarh-262531 |
| 4. | Sh. Madhav K. Kejriwal | Director | M/s Jalandharygad Hydro Pvt. Ltd. | Kishori Niwas, 24/73 Birhana Road, Kanpur - 208001, Uttar Pradesh |
| 5. | M/s Kakoragad Hydro Pvt. Ltd. | Kishori Niwas, 24/73 Birhana Road, Kanpur - 208001, Uttar Pradesh | ||
| 6. | M/s Siyangad Hydro Pvt. Ltd. | Kishori Niwas, 24/73 Birhana Road, Kanpur - 208001, Uttar Pradesh | ||
| 7. | Sh. R.K. Bahuguna | President | M/s Akshay Urja Association | 47/1, Chakrata Road, Vasant Vihar, Dehradun-248006 |
| 8. | Sh. Sameer Khirpurikar | Asstt. Manager (Regulatory and Policy Affairs) | M/s Amplus Infrastructure Developers Pvt. Ltd. | Palm Square Building, 6 th Floor, Golf Course Extension Road, Sector-66, Gurgaon, Haryana-122102 |
| 9. | - | - | M/s Distributed Solar Power Association | A-57, DDA Sheds, Okhla Industrial Phase-II, New Delhi- 110020 |
| 10. | Sh. Pankaj Gupta | President | M/s Industries Association of Uttarakhand | Mohabewala Industrial Area, Dehradun-248110 |
| 11. | Sh. J.S. Bisht | CEO & Managing Director | M/s Ados Renewable Pvt. Ltd. | Office: G-28, Nehru Colony, Dehradun |
| 12. | Sh. Purushottam Singh | Director (Operations) | UJVN Ltd. | "Ujjwal", Maharani Bagh, GMS Road, Dehradun - 248006 |
| 13. | Sh. Sanjaya Mittal | Director (Projects) | Power Transmission Corporation of Uttarakhand Ltd. | Vidyut Bhawan, Near I.S.B.T. Crossing, Saharanpur Road, Majra, Dehradun-248002 |
| 14. | Sh. A.K. Tyagi | Chief Project Officer | Uttarakhand Renewable Energy Development Agency | Urja Park Campus, Industrial Area, Patel Nagar, Dehradun |
| 15. | Dr. (Mrs.) Namita Kaushik | - | - | Villa No. 3, Rajpur Road, Enclave Dhoran Khas, Opp. I.T. Park, Dehradun-248001 |
| 16. | Sh. Harish Bisht | - | - | Village Bhareth, Block Yamkeshwar, Distt. Pauri Garhwal |
| Sr. No. | Name | Designation | Organisation | Address |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17. | Sh. Bhuwneshwar Uniyal | - | - | P.O.-Chayi Damrada, Tehsil-Vithyani, Block-Yamkeshwar, Distt. Pauri Garhwal-246121 |
| 18. | Sh. S.P. Joshi | - | - | Village-Bukandi, P.O.-Heerakhal, Block-Yamkeshwar, Distt. Pauri Garhwal |
| 19. | Sh. Vikas Uniyal | - | - | Uniyal/Chai Damrara, P.O.-Chai Damrara, Distt. Pauri Garhwal |
| 20. | Sh. Pradeep Singh Bisht | Village-Bhareth, PO-Pokhri, Block-Yamkeshwar, Distt. Pauri Garhwal | ||
| 21. | - | - | M/s ACME Solar Holdings Pvt. Ltd. | Plot No. 152, Sector-44, Gurugram-122002, Haryana |
| 22. | Sh. Arun Gupta | Chairman-cum-Managing Director | M/s Him Urja Pvt. Ltd. | S-321, Panchsheel Park, New Delhi-110017 |
| 23. | Sh. K.V. Vikram Reddy | Managing Director | M/s Himalaya Hydro Pvt. Ltd. | Plot No. 46, Flat No. 202, MLA & MPs Colony, Road No. 10-C, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad-500033 |
| 24. | Sh. Rishabh Kejriwal | - | M/s Birahi Ganga Hydro Power Ltd. | 32-33, Nehru Place, Flat No-403, New Delhi-110019 |
| 25. | Sh. S.K. Tamta | Chief Engineer | Uttarakhand Power Corporation Ltd. | Victoria Cross Vijeta Gabar Singh Bhawan, Kanwali Road, Dehradun. |
| Sr. No. | Name | Designation | Organisation | Address |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Sh. M.R. Ghosh | Whole Time Director | M/s Emami Power Ltd. | Emami Tower, 2 nd Floor, 687 Anandpur, E.M. Bypass, Kolkata-700107 |
| 2. | Sh. Nitin Tiwari | Project Manager | M/s Emami Power Ltd. | Roorkee |
| 3. | Sh. Rajnish Jain | CEO/Founder | M/s Avani Bio Energy Pvt. Ltd. | PO Tripuradevi, via Berinag, Distt. Pithoragarh-262531 |
| 4. | Sh. Devesh Kaushik | Sr. Manager | M/s EDEN Renewables India LLP | Unit 236-B/236-C, DLF South Court, Saket, New Delhi-110017 |
| 5. | Sh. Vipul Kapil | Site Incharge | M/s Technique Solaire Invest 1 India Pvt. Ltd. | Village-Maheshwari, Near Chudiwala, Bhagwanpur, Roorkee, Distt. Haridwar-247661 |
| 6. | Sh. Atul Kumar | O.N.M. Incharge | M/s ABRE Solar Power Plant | Gurukul Narsan, Gurukul Narsan Road, Narsan Kalan, Distt. Haridwar-247670 |
| 7. | Sh. Purushottam Singh | Director (Operations) | UJVN Ltd. | “Ujjwal”, Maharani Bagh, GMS Road, Dehradun - 248006 |
| 8. | Sh. Meg Bahadur | General Manager (Commercial) | UJVN Ltd. | “Ujjwal”, Maharani Bagh, GMS Road, Dehradun - 248006 |
| 9. | Sh. Arjun Pratap Singh | Executive Engineer (Commercial) | Uttarakhand Power Corporation Ltd. | Victoria Cross Vijeta Gabar Singh Bhawan, Kanwali Road, Dehradun. |
| 10. | Sh. R.C. Mayal | Superintending Engineer (Comm.) | Uttarakhand Power Corporation Ltd. | Victoria Cross Vijeta Gabar Singh Bhawan, Kanwali Road, Dehradun. |
| 11. | Sh. A.K. Tyagi | Chief Project Officer | Uttarakhand Renewable Energy Development Agency | Urja Park Campus, Industrial Area, Patel Nagar, Dehradun |
| 12. | Sh. C.P. Agrawal | Dy. Chief Project Officer | Uttarakhand Renewable Energy Development Agency | Urja Park Campus, Industrial Area, Patel Nagar, Dehradun |
| 13. | Sh. Kamal Kant | Chief Engineer | Power Transmission Corporation of Uttarakhand Ltd. | Vidyut Bhawan, Near I.S.B.T. Crossing, Saharanpur Road, Majra, Dehradun-248002 |
| 14. | Sh. Ambrish Sharma | Executive Engineer (Commercial) | UJVN Ltd. | “Ujjwal”, Maharani Bagh, GMS Road, Dehradun - 248006 |
| 15. | Sh. Dinesh Chandra Sharma | Executive Engineer (Commercial) | UJVN Ltd. | “Ujjwal”, Maharani Bagh, GMS Road, Dehradun - 248006 |
| 16. | Ms. Neha Nirala | Asstt. Engineer | Power Transmission | Vidyut Bhawan, Near |
| Sr. No. | Name | Designation | Organisation | Address |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Corporation of Uttarakhand Ltd. | I.S.B.T. Crossing, Saharanpur Road, Majra, Dehradun-248002 | |||
| 17. | Sh. Himanshu Baliyan | Executive Engineer | Power Transmission Corporation of Uttarakhand Ltd. | Vidyut Bhawan, Near I.S.B.T. Crossing, Saharanpur Road, Majra, Dehradun-248002 |
| 18. | Sh. Vikas Sharma | Superintending Engineer (C&R) | Power Transmission Corporation of Uttarakhand Ltd. | Vidyut Bhawan, Near I.S.B.T. Crossing, Saharanpur Road, Majra, Dehradun-248002 |
| 19. | Sh. Arun Gupta | Chairman-cum-Managing Director | M/s Him Urja Pvt. Ltd. | S-321, Panchsheel Park, New Delhi-110017 |
| 20. | Sh. Manu Gupta | Director | M/s Him Urja Pvt. Ltd. | S-321, Panchsheel Park, New Delhi-110017 |
| 21. | Sh. B.S. Sehrawat | Plant Head | M/s ACME Solar Holdings Ltd. | Sector-5, Plot No. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, IIE, Rudrapur, Distt. Udham Singh Nagar-263153 |
| 22. | Sh. Mohan Krishna Kejriwal | Managing Director | M/s Harsil Hydro Ltd. | Kishori Niwas, Birhana Road, Kanpur-208001, Uttar Pradesh |
| 23. | Ms. Jyoti Dhar | Director | M/s Alius Energy System | A6, Ganga Stahl, Part-2, Kailash Gate, Rishikesh-249201, Uttarakhand |
| 24. | Sh. D.S. Rawat | Plant Owner | - | Village-Odda, Block-Koti, P.O.-Khandyusain, Distt. Pauri Garhwal |
| 25. | Sh. Kavindra Singh Bisht | Plant Owner | - | 1148, Indira Nagar Colony, PO-New Forest, Vasant Vihar, Dehradun-248006 |
| 26. | Sh. Manoj Uniyal | - | - | Village-Badongaon, P.O. Lamkot, Distt. Tehri Garhwal |
| 27. | Sh. Manish Kathait | Treasurer | M/s Akshay Urja Association | 47/1, Chakrata Road, Vasant Vihar, Dehradun-248006 |